General Discussion

yellowwoodII

(616 posts) Thu Jan 1, 2015, 11:13 AM Jan 2015

Why Is Population Growth Seldom Discussed? [View all]

When the first baby was born today, the world population stood at about 7.2 billion, according to this.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2014/12/31/us-population-2015-320-million-and-world-population-72-billion
So many important issues are discussed on DU, but I seldom see anything about world population.
Environment--Increased food supply comes with a price--GMO's, energy, agricultural chemicals, water depletion.
Energy needs--fracking, nuclear waste, etc.
Wars--Many of the wars that we see come about over limited resources--water, oil, land.
People are praising the Pope for his new attitudes, but I don't see anything about a change in birth control rules
Infrastructure-transportation, river pollution.
I could go on, but you know about this.
These issues are interrelated. Mother Earth can only hold so many.

221 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why Is Population Growth Seldom Discussed? [View all] yellowwoodII Jan 2015 OP

You're right that it's an important marym625 Jan 2015 #1

US and Europe have decreased having as many children yeoman6987 Jan 2015 #84

It's a taboo subject dumbcat Jan 2015 #2

Lack of consensus that there's a problem MH1 Jan 2015 #42

+++100 Duppers Jan 2015 #88

+1000 smirkymonkey Jan 2015 #126

I've never reproduced. safeinOhio Jan 2015 #3

My 2 sons will not be fathers, their choice. dixiegrrrrl Jan 2015 #66

People don't want to discuss it NV Whino Jan 2015 #4

Because it isnt REALLY a problem, except for xenophobes and Republicans reddread Jan 2015 #5

So, since we here in America are OK dumbcat Jan 2015 #8

We have very little influence over other country's demographics, but we in the Ed Suspicious Jan 2015 #34

Bingo. ucrdem Jan 2015 #10

In your opinion, what is the carrying capacity of the planet? 1 Trillion? MH1 Jan 2015 #44

It is REALLY at the heart of our most difficult problems. earthside Jan 2015 #63

THANK YOU. Nobody ever wants to hear this, but it is so true. raccoon Jan 2015 #72

The issue of population growth is not only about physical space. NYC Liberal Jan 2015 #68

You're wrong tabasco Jan 2015 #220

This message was self-deleted by its author reddread Jan 2015 #221

Prolly cause the topic raises the notion of genocide as a solution.. Jesus Malverde Jan 2015 #6

Really? You think there are about 2.4 million new undocumented immigrants every year? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2015 #23

Thank you! Duppers Jan 2015 #92

Fairly obvious to anyone who lives in a city... Jesus Malverde Jan 2015 #105

So you're the kind of person who automatically thinks 'illegal' when they hear 'immigrant' muriel_volestrangler Jan 2015 #111

.. Jesus Malverde Jan 2015 #112

Because we've pretty much found the solution, it just takes time Recursion Jan 2015 #154

How much time do you think we have? GliderGuider Jan 2015 #155

Quite a bit Recursion Jan 2015 #156

Thanks, that explains it. nt GliderGuider Jan 2015 #160

Like global warming rock Jan 2015 #7

And They Are Basically Two Sides Of The Same Coin DallasNE Jan 2015 #27

"Mother Earth can only hold so many." Malthus was wrong in 1798 and he's still wrong. ucrdem Jan 2015 #9

When i go back and read comments based on Malthus, they generally are of hedgehog Jan 2015 #36

So you're saying the opposite, "Mother Earth can hold an infinite number"? MH1 Jan 2015 #45

Those aren't the only two options FBaggins Jan 2015 #60

Seriously? TM99 Jan 2015 #96

Seriously. People dress it up all kinds of ways ucrdem Jan 2015 #159

You have obviously not read this work TM99 Jan 2015 #169

LOL. Malthus also declares his false assumptions "obvious." nt ucrdem Jan 2015 #171

In other words, TM99 Jan 2015 #189

Just cutting to the chase. ucrdem Jan 2015 #201

Good progressives would be talking about it as among the top five priorities. NYC_SKP Jan 2015 #11

exactly! More density = More progressive policies. reddread Jan 2015 #28

Progressives favor plenty of things that aren't already in place MH1 Jan 2015 #46

Because a practical implementation would unbridle the arrogance of humanity. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #12

Civilization and every institution we've built in it is based on more people doing more things The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #13

Go forth and multiply...preferably white and cute. Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2015 #14

"white and cute"? whaaa? nt alp227 Jan 2015 #158

Because you're not willing to say that you shouldn't exist. Dreamer Tatum Jan 2015 #15

^^^^^ mopinko Jan 2015 #33

Plenty say "let it begin with me" as far as not reproducing. MH1 Jan 2015 #48

Wha?? You're conflating population control with genocide? CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #167

Because any discussion is going to put it into a severely negative light and TheKentuckian Jan 2015 #16

Because it's a pointless subject. Igel Jan 2015 #17

Maybe because it isn't our job to police other people's reproduction? Demeter Jan 2015 #18

The US "did our part" is wrong. The US is overpopulated. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #86

Oh please! AlbertCat Jan 2015 #19

What should "we" do, though? delta17 Jan 2015 #39

that is what I told my youngest daughter Kalidurga Jan 2015 #81

This sums it up: Maedhros Jan 2015 #94

NEARLY half of all people now live in countries where women, on average, give birth to fewer than NewDeal_Dem Jan 2015 #20

This has been a concern of mine since learning about it in grade school and seeing it up front joanbarnes Jan 2015 #21

Good question. Basic LA Jan 2015 #22

Because population growth adieu Jan 2015 #24

Plus the global decline in birthrates as well. (nt) Posteritatis Jan 2015 #29

"A steep decline in deaths." LWolf Jan 2015 #211

I did not reproduce. The Green Manalishi Jan 2015 #25

Lol! CrispyQ Jan 2015 #58

love it! Duppers Jan 2015 #98

That sounds like you have a small circle of acquaintances FrodosPet Jan 2015 #195

Negative on h. sapiens in general The Green Manalishi Jan 2015 #205

+1 I hear ya! GliderGuider Jan 2015 #207

Population growth is most accurately chervilant Jan 2015 #26

a.f.m Duppers Jan 2015 #101

Actually, most populations are best represented by a logistic function. GliderGuider Jan 2015 #208

Thank you, Paul!! chervilant Jan 2015 #213

Population growth and carrying capacity GliderGuider Jan 2015 #214

You are right - human population increase is the fundamental problem Cassidy Jan 2015 #30

Educating men is also a direct way to reduce human population and to have fewer children. appalachiablue Jan 2015 #56

I'm skeptical metalbot Jan 2015 #147

"Educating women" doesn't refer to educating them on birth control; it refers to DebJ Jan 2015 #163

I understand that. Women are far more than walking uteruses. Men must also receive general and appalachiablue Jan 2015 #192

Maybe because it seems to be a problem that is solving itself as long hedgehog Jan 2015 #31

Very interesting Responses So Far yellowwoodII Jan 2015 #32

you missed the most important one, made more than once. mopinko Jan 2015 #35

Who do I think I am? the same person who has the right to tell you MH1 Jan 2015 #50

do you now? mopinko Jan 2015 #53

Not strip mining. More like carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. MH1 Jan 2015 #57

plenty of more wasteful sources of carbon out there than children. mopinko Jan 2015 #106

"maybe you took a wrong turn somewhere" - LOL MH1 Jan 2015 #108

Man, your posts are a perfect example of the completely tuned out bubble big chunks of this place Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #118

Seems to me you're more the one in a tuned out bubble muriel_volestrangler Jan 2015 #122

Im not saying ignore the world outside the USA, I'm saying global population isnt fungible. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #136

Maybe that would be better discussed without the words muriel_volestrangler Jan 2015 #165

Yeah, the 'reasonable' guy making vaguely violent-sounding noises about what 'they' will do to 'you' Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #166

And if people took that approach with the parts of the world that actually do have problems with Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #116

So true. polly7 Jan 2015 #144

And look at what happened with what should have been a manageable ebola outbreak. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #148

Eventually, nature will make the choice for us. Cassidy Jan 2015 #59

Fallacy of the excluded middle Jim Lane Jan 2015 #87

We haven't done absolutely nothing. We've given people the tools to make their own reproductive Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #119

We haven't done nothing, but also haven't done all we could. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #121

Either we're saying the same thing, or we aren't. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #134

If you refer to a "so-called population problem" then we're probably not saying the same thing. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #182

You're damn right I put it in quotes. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #198

Growth is a real problem, and so is the current high population. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #200

Yes, I lean towards the technological fix school of thought, if I can be ascribed to any "school" Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #202

We shouldn't put all our eggs in the technological fix basket. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #204

So yes, you yourself acknowledge that there's a rather large gap between the 1st world Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #206

The Third World has higher population growth, but we also have an overpopulation problem. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #217

And round and round and round we go, like I said, either we're saying the same thing or we aren't. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #218

Jury results: 0-7 to LEAVE IT. I kid you not. Your post was alerted. Cerridwen Jan 2015 #107

oy. mopinko Jan 2015 #109

It's okay, we can easily solve the over-population problem. tclambert Jan 2015 #37

Weird Coincidence.. I was just about to post an OP how the Reich Wing used this issue to their 2banon Jan 2015 #38

Very interesting points. Agree it seems that more thoughtful, caring liberals behaved in a appalachiablue Jan 2015 #64

My One Child is now an adult in her 40's.. She and her Wife got married several years ago 2banon Jan 2015 #70

How wonderful for you, two grandgirls. Agree we need serious catchup in population nos.for the left appalachiablue Jan 2015 #80

agreed. and the superrich have more kids than the middle classes do, on average. and they NewDeal_Dem Jan 2015 #97

I think it pits the developed world against the developing world etherealtruth Jan 2015 #40

THANK YOU. nt raccoon Jan 2015 #73

^^^^The correct answer^^^^ Starry Messenger Jan 2015 #145

Because you cannot support reproductive freedom and choice.. MicaelS Jan 2015 #41

Some people just wake up in the morning pissed off that they can't tell everyone else what to do. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #120

we don't live as isolated islands on this planet Duppers Jan 2015 #127

And I thought it was only right wing fundamentalists who were anti-choice. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #137

What happened to yellowwood1? Starry Messenger Jan 2015 #43

his parents have a time machine. they realized their error. nt mopinko Jan 2015 #54

I don't want any children so I'm selfishly doing my part. I think? the problem is BlueJazz Jan 2015 #47

Because... sendero Jan 2015 #49

People are selfish PasadenaTrudy Jan 2015 #51

Because the problem is solving itself. jeff47 Jan 2015 #52

Look at the latest predictions exboyfil Jan 2015 #62

Hey, it looks a lot like the earlier predictions that didn't come to pass. jeff47 Jan 2015 #129

And what about the natural carrying capacity for non-human species ffr Jan 2015 #74

Why do you have to lie to make your point? jeff47 Jan 2015 #132

Doesn't dignify a response. n/t ffr Jan 2015 #162

Neither did your lies. (nt) jeff47 Jan 2015 #178

Yes - what I was going to say: bhikkhu Jan 2015 #75

"We haven't had disaster and doom..." Who is included in "we"? Cassidy Jan 2015 #90

I bring it up as often as I can on DU and with everyone I speak to ffr Jan 2015 #55

The Optimum Population Trust ffr Jan 2015 #65

Population growth is essential to understanding the rise of global neoliberal economics and climate appalachiablue Jan 2015 #61

So how do we get Asians and Africans to quit reproducing? FrodosPet Jan 2015 #67

Assumption yellowwoodII Jan 2015 #69

You know what happens when you assume, right? FrodosPet Jan 2015 #194

Why? Iggo Jan 2015 #71

Because in the 4 hrs since this thread started, 76,000 more humans were added ffr Jan 2015 #78

Is that gross or net? Iggo Jan 2015 #79

Google! Damn it. As soon as I type a number it goes up. ffr Jan 2015 #82

Lol...take it easy! Iggo Jan 2015 #83

Lol...good luck ffr Jan 2015 #85

Wars will be fought over water in the near future. Calista241 Jan 2015 #175

I Don't Think that We "Get" Anyone To Do Anything yellowwoodII Jan 2015 #100

It does get discussed, but not as often or in the way it should be. SheilaT Jan 2015 #76

+1 You hit it dead on. ffr Jan 2015 #95

Thank you. SheilaT Jan 2015 #102

Identifying the problem is of little use unless you have a solution. surrealAmerican Jan 2015 #77

First step toward a solution: "Every child a wanted child." Jim Lane Jan 2015 #89

Anyone who wants to talk about sustainabilty but won't talk about population issues is a hypocrite. Bluenorthwest Jan 2015 #91

isn't this something that is more connected to poverty, lack of education and other rights for JI7 Jan 2015 #93

Parental Procreation Permit seveneyes Jan 2015 #99

You're right. Need to crash our population nicely, before nature and war does it for us badly on point Jan 2015 #103

Then why is the US fertility rate stable, or even declining? Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #115

Answ: Because of education and pressure on women in occupations. on point Jan 2015 #193

Anyone can throw numbers out and claim them as authoritative. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #197

Because birth control is against many religion's policies. Dont call me Shirley Jan 2015 #104

Well, here are some reasons. rogerashton Jan 2015 #110

Because in economically developed countries where people are free and have access to contraception Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #113

They're not separate issues The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #176

Saying it will have to be addressed no matter what is not the same thing as saying they're linked. Warren DeMontague Jan 2015 #199

several reasons DonCoquixote Jan 2015 #114

humans quadrupled in only 1/2 a century. The mass-extinction was underway at least 15 yrs ago. stuntcat Jan 2015 #117

its an old chestnut reddread Jan 2015 #123

Webster Tarpley? You're going to quote a Lyndon LaRouche supporter who says we should follow Genesis muriel_volestrangler Jan 2015 #125

im pointing to an old ruse from the same interests, and got a rise out of you reddread Jan 2015 #128

It's usually not a safe subject. ozone_man Jan 2015 #124

contoversial topic Liberal_in_LA Jan 2015 #130

Here are a couple of population-related graphics worth thinking about: GliderGuider Jan 2015 #131

The context missing in your first graphic jeff47 Jan 2015 #138

At the bottom I note that replacement TFR is 2.1 GliderGuider Jan 2015 #140

Um...1.0 would be horrific. jeff47 Jan 2015 #141

Retirement problems we can figure out. Missing keystone species, not so much. GliderGuider Jan 2015 #142

No, we really can't "figure it out" jeff47 Jan 2015 #143

Actually I have thought an awful lot about it. GliderGuider Jan 2015 #149

Thinking it for a long time is not thinking about it. jeff47 Jan 2015 #177

Sounds like we should be privitizing the profits of the planet, and socializing the costs The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #180

Quick!!! CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!! jeff47 Jan 2015 #181

Currently The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #184

Unless we start converting energy into matter jeff47 Jan 2015 #185

You're not hearing me on the privatization thing The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #191

+1 GliderGuider Jan 2015 #209

Thanks for sharing. GliderGuider Jan 2015 #188

+1000 smirkymonkey Jan 2015 #133

We are well into overshoot with significant carrying capacity degradation. airplaneman Jan 2015 #135

I can't wait for posts when December articles of Stephanie Seneff, Phd. MIT Senior Scientific Staff appalachiablue Jan 2015 #139

We need more trumpeting ... JEFF9K Jan 2015 #146

I find it surprising that people actually think OnionPatch Jan 2015 #150

actually the mathematics behind a lower birth rate is pretty impressive airplaneman Jan 2015 #164

Parasites who kill their host cause their own deaths. Jamastiene Jan 2015 #151

I think it should be discussed more especially in the US davidpdx Jan 2015 #152

Because, JESUS. eom progressoid Jan 2015 #153

Because it inevitably leads to accusations "YOUR A NAZI WHO WANTS MASS GENOCIDE/STERILIZATION" alp227 Jan 2015 #157

Utopia Series 2 Episode 6 Opening Scene Jesus Malverde Jan 2015 #161

Not only is it seldom discussed CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #168

That's because society is based on more people doing more things The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #179

People who don't have children are "screwing everyone else"? Bullshit. CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #203

Because people do not want to hear this. RoccoR5955 Jan 2015 #170

What is a reasonable level? The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #173

That's a difficult question to answer. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #183

That's what makes it so contentious and fun The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #186

I don't agree that seven billion is sustainable just because that's the current number. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #187

It's sustainable until the spending hits $10,000 The2ndWheel Jan 2015 #190

Environmentalists who address sustainability don't give that word the broad meaning that you do. Jim Lane Jan 2015 #196

"Sustainable" is a very slippery term because most people don't attach a time period to it. GliderGuider Jan 2015 #212

Humanity is too greedy & simplistic to change its parasitic behavior Triana Jan 2015 #172

Re: food and water shortages Triana Jan 2015 #174

Because it intersects LWolf Jan 2015 #210

In fairness to the catholic church Trillo Jan 2015 #215

KICK for further discussion Homer Wells Jan 2015 #216

I've posted about it many times in the past, and will do so again. It's our most 20score Jan 2015 #219