World Faces Population Explosion in Poor Countries

[Joanne98]

World faces population explosion in poor countries

Rich nations will downsize, but Britain will grow faster than any European country

John Vidal, environment editor
Wednesday August 18, 2004
The Guardian

The world is heading for wildly uneven population swings in the next 45 years, with many rich countries "downsizing" during a period in which almost all developing nations will grow at breakneck speed, according to a comprehensive report by leading US demographers released yesterday.
They predict that at least an extra 1,000 million will be living in the world's poorest African countries by 2050. There will be an extra 120 million more Americans, and India will leapfrog China to become the world's most populous country. One in six people in western Europe will be over the age of 65 by 2050.

But the populations of some countries will shrink. Based on a number of factors, including analysis of birth and death rates, Bulgaria is expected to lose almost 40 per cent of its population.

Britain is expected to grow faster than any other major European country. Within 20 years, the authors expect it to have four million more people, at which point its growth is expected to tail off, adding only a further 1.5 million in the next 25 years to eventually reach 65 million. By then it will have overtaken France as Europe's second or third largest country, depending whether Russia is classed to be in Europe or partly in Asia.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1285277,00.html

[Osama_Bin_Winnin]

1. Cheap Labor. Bush will be drooling

[LauraK]

2. United Nations Population Fund (Don't let the GOP see this)

"UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, is the world's largest international source of funding for population and reproductive health programmes. Since we began operations in 1969, the Fund has provided nearly $6 billion in assistance to developing countries.

UNFPA works with governments and non-governmental organizations in over 140 countries, at their request, and with the support of the international community. We support programmes that help women, men and young people:

- plan their families and avoid unwanted pregnancies
- undergo pregnancy and childbirth safely
- avoid sexually transmitted infections(STIs) - including HIV/AIDS
- combat violence against women.

Together, these elements promote reproductive health-a state of complete physical, mental and social well being in all matters related to the reproductive system. Reproductive health is recognized as a human right, part of the right to health.

UNFPA also helps governments in the world's poorest countries, and in other countries in need, to formulate population policies and strategies in support of sustainable development. All UNFPA-funded programmes promote women's equality.

UNFPA works to raise awareness of these needs among people everywhere. We advocate for close attention to population problems and help to mobilize resources to solve them."

[lastknowngood]

3. Not be insulting but Catholic church is expanding and telling all

the poor people they can find they need to make as many catholics as possible. If we eliminate the catholic church much of the problem will be solved. But then that's logical not theological.

[James T. Kirk]

5. Catholic Church

O8)
Just so you know, we're not going to be eliminated.
O8)

[Massacure]

4. I hate to sound cruel however,

Since most of the population will be in the poor countries, won't they basically just collapse under their own weight? The farmland is mainly in the rich areas, and so it will obviously be sold to rich people before it will exported to poorer countries.

[James T. Kirk]

6. Don't panic!

I am not worried about the increase in size of the human population.

1. Technological advances will spread to underdeveloped parts of the world. Crop yields will increase, nutrition will improve and health care will improve. The chances of mass starvation are dropping.

2. People will move. People from poor countries will move to countries that need people. It happens in America and it happens in Europe. If India gets too crowded, people will move to Romania and Japan.

3. Huge parts of the world are undeveloped and underpopulated. Ever been to North Dakota? That state could hold many more people than live there now.

Go humanity!
:D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie::D:):o:P:9:*:7B-):hippie:

[Thor_MN]

8. It could, but can enough food be produced locally?

I know the eastern edge is very productive farmland (as did my great grandparents), but where you see it fade from green to brown on maps may as well be a satellite photo. If we don't find cheap alternatives for petroleum, the western Dakotas could someday resemble Afganistan...

On the other hand, I totally support your idea of moving people as opposed to moving food. Call me cold, but I cringe everytime I see a "Feed the children in Kreblahbistan, save them from the famine!!!" commercial. Save them so they can watch their children die in the next famine 10 years from now? If technolgy can make the land more productive, I'm all for it, but merely shipping food in will not solve anything...

[James T. Kirk]

13. "western Dakotas could someday resemble Afghanistan..."

North Dakota - 3.5 people per square kilometer
Afghanistan - 43 people per square kilometer

Afghanistan supports way more people than North Dakota.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

[NickB79]

9. I am very worried about it

"1. Technological advances will spread to underdeveloped parts of the world. Crop yields will increase, nutrition will improve and health care will improve. The chances of mass starvation are dropping."

Overdependance on technology will allow us to bury our heads in the sand longer until it is too late to do anything to stave off starvation. Crop yields COULD increase, if it weren't for the fact that global warming is already starting to influence global climate patterns. Snowpacks in the US West and in the Himalayas are diminishing rapidly, threatening the flow of rivers used to irrigate crops. Fully half of the crops grown in India are irrigated from riverwater melting off the snowpack of the Himalayas. Lose that, and hundreds of millions would starve. Similarly, any change in the Gulf Stream will dramatically cool the eastern US and western Europe, further degrading crop yields. The US West is already suffering from long-standing droughts possibly brought on by global warming.

Ignoring global warming, what happens when our oil supplies start to peter out over the next 10-30 yrs? Less fertilizers for the crops, more expense to transport them across the world, and more expense for the poor who need cheap food the most. The Green Revolution that saved millions from starvation in the 70's was extremely dependant on oil-based fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. Without them, the whole system collapses back to subsistance farming. One option might be genetically-engineered crops that can either synthesize their own fertilizers and pesticides, or simply live off of poor soil more easily, but look how well GM technology has gone over in most of the world (Europe being a prime example of the fear of GM foodstuffs).

"2. People will move. People from poor countries will move to countries that need people. It happens in America and it happens in Europe. If India gets too crowded, people will move to Romania and Japan."

I trust you've studied history books that chronicle what happens when large groups of people of a different culture and religion migrate into a new area populated by those of a different culture and religion? Racism, caste systems creating second-class citizens, and even outright civil war more often than not occur.

"3. Huge parts of the world are undeveloped and underpopulated. Ever been to North Dakota? That state could hold many more people than live there now."

There's a good reason many parts of the world are undeveloped and underpopulated. They suck to live in. The Alaskan tundra, the middle of the Sahara or Australian desert, and the peaks of the Rocky Mountains are not exactly my ideal when I think about building a house. Those few areas that are nice to live in that are underdeveloped need to stay that way, in order to preserve what we have left of nature. I'm sure there are millions of acres of land in national forests and wildlife preserves in the US that would be breathtaking to build upon, but they are protected to preserve some of our nation's heritage and beauty. I don't want to put condos in Yellowstone, do you?

And as far as North Dakota, I have been there, and it serves a very good purpose as a largely unpopulated state. It is part of the US breadbasket, producing the food we and much of the world eats. I don't want to see farmland vital to feeding the additional billion+ humans in 2050 paved over for more strip malls and Walmarts.

[eridani]

10. The state may be able to hold them, but--

--there won't be anything for them to drink or take a bath in.

[Nordic]

11. Hm, someone who calls himself "James T. Kirk" just might be

a bit delusional, no?

KIDDING.

Okay, not really. Overpopulation is the biggest threat facing the planet IMHO

[James T. Kirk]

14. Overpopulation

Then what is the right population for the world?

[Thor_MN]

7. Is the US in population decline?

Why all the benefits for having children? Why should I paying MORE in taxes when I use less resources? I like kids and all, but I don't have any of my own, so why should I have to pay for other people's kids?

While on the topic, why is it that married people are seen as more desireable for high power/prestige positions? Single people can't really be disgraced/blackmailed in a sex scandal...

[Nordic]

12. same reason your car insurance drops when you marry

Marriage usually causes one to be more stable.

As far as the tax burden, well when you're out buying diapers and milk and aveeno, let me know how you feel. :)

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone with kids that to compare, say single person making, say, 80K a year and a married person making 80K a year, the single person has a LOT more "disposable" income than the married person.