Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
15. That doesn't really help understand or solve the problem GG.
Mon May 21, 2012, 03:07 PM
May 2012

I predicated my post on things we know to be true.

*You* conclude we are "in overshoot". That position is not generally accepted as true.

You assume that should we change the pace of development for energy impoverished nations, that this would not impact the population growth before we hit 10B. That may or may not be true, but I don't think it is the default assumption we must use to approach the matter since it presupposes there is no solution and therefore no attempt need be made. In a search for solutions it has no affirmative place in the discussion.

You say we need to reduce our population to 1-3 B. Again, that is speculation that amounts to little more than a made up number. It sounds good, but since we don't know the impact that humans living a "truly sustainable" lifestyle would have we can't possibly extrapolate what the "truly sustainable" population might be, right?

In short, why not help try to solve the problem?

ETA: Brainfart Alert

I took your post as a reply to one I made earlier this afternoon. My reply is still largely valid if I include that text:

The way I think the population/resource issue will play out.

There is no question that in the modern world population expansion is driven by conditions associated with undeveloped societies. We can leave aside specific reasons for this discussion.

There is no question that post industrial societies are characterized by population contraction. Again, we can leave aside specific reasons for this discussion.

There is no question that global resources critical to maintaining a human friendly ecosystem are strained and poorly understood in any comprehensive sense.

We are bringing more of the world into the sphere of societies that experience declining populations.

War, economic collapse or events like that do not accomplish the goal of altering population growth trends, over time as their effect tends to get cancelled by following rebound effects.

That makes it a race to, in sustainable fashion, bring lagging societies to a level that results in declining birth rates before we irreversibly alter our ecosystem to the point of inhabitability.

The foundation of that effort is continued acquisition of knowledge about sustainable development and deployment of those infrastructures throughout the world.

At the present time, supporting development that continues to make renewable energy more affordable for the societies struggling with massive energy poverty is one the most concrete steps you can take to help accelerate the transition to global population reduction.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=15431

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Religion dimbear May 2012 #1
Absolutely get the red out May 2012 #3
We need to find ways to raise consciousness of this issue. Real programs and ideas. Gregorian May 2012 #2
I didn't need an an anthropomorphic child. I had younger siblings. hunter May 2012 #20
I'd like to say religion but I know many young people who are not into religion but having kids. freshwest May 2012 #4
I grew up in an intelligent neighborhood. Almost none of my friends has children. Gregorian May 2012 #5
They're quite intelligent, and believe me, I've lived areas I wouldn't say that about. I don't know freshwest May 2012 #6
There are different kinds of intelligence. Gregorian May 2012 #8
I think there's something inherently optimistic in all life XemaSab May 2012 #7
Yes, but... GliderGuider May 2012 #9
Global fertility rate 2.46 / US 2.06 / Japan 1.21 / Libya 2.96 kristopher May 2012 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author GliderGuider May 2012 #11
Global population is rising linearly by 75 million people per year. GliderGuider May 2012 #12
That doesn't really help understand or solve the problem GG. kristopher May 2012 #15
We know the population is rising by 75 M/year. That's true too. GliderGuider May 2012 #17
If you'll notice the course described has nothing to do with what you're saying. kristopher May 2012 #18
You must have an allergy GliderGuider May 2012 #19
There was a thread on this topic a few weeks ago CrispyQ May 2012 #13
Why do people purposefully give the next 90+ years to their babies? stuntcat May 2012 #14
IMO we are into the beginning of the bottleneck. GliderGuider May 2012 #16
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Population Is Popping: Wh...»Reply #15