POPULATION

[dillpicklechips]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

We have this called our personal spaces, intimate, territorial and just our owm space, maybe we cam live comfortable depends om how the person itself handle it  or how he manage to ignore the people, mind your own business. This analogy is a better example to give ease on mind when it comes on living comfortably.

Sadly the reality is that we cant live comfortably, the mere fact that some of us doesnt have the privacy mostly the people that are living on an area which many people occupied all of the spaces, to be more specific is the status of most cities that are living in poverty.

[1714948298]

1714948298

[1714948298]

1714948298

[1714948298]

1714948298

[JC btc]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

We have this called our personal spaces, intimate, territorial and just our owm space, maybe we cam live comfortable depends om how the person itself handle it  or how he manage to ignore the people, mind your own business. This analogy is a better example to give ease on mind when it comes on living comfortably.

Sadly the reality is that we cant live comfortably, the mere fact that some of us doesnt have the privacy mostly the people that are living on an area which many people occupied all of the spaces, to be more specific is the status of most cities that are living in poverty.

I disagree with that, still we can live comfortably despite the fact that we are too populated, here in our country although we are too populated still we choose to live our life at its best. Actually, having a populated country creates a lot of opportunities, the demand is increasing so we can do business whatever we want and wherever place.

[hatadiri]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

Now problems and many people and even the young are interested in survival in the wild . For example in Siberia or in the forests of Canada.  This is now a very popular movement and you can read more about it.

[tvbcof]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

Now problems and many people and even the young are interested in survival in the wild . For example in Siberia or in the forests of Canada.  This is now a very popular movement and you can read more about it.

Forget it.  The people who own the planet have already claimed the millions of square miles of those kinds of places and let plebs go there only in very controlled conditions.  Mostly to work on resource extraction for them.

The plebs home is the 'human habitats'.  That is, a 24 m^2 chunk of floor area usually between 5 and 40 meters above the surface of the earth.  You can rent it.  If you have no money it will be subsidized.  You don't get to own it, or really anything else because...you know...24 m^2 allotment.

Note that as a demonstration of the infinite kindness of our wise earth-saving leaders you will have some greenspace in which to walk with 'doggie reflection pools' for your dog.  You can (for a energy credit deduction) have a small pet of some sort.  Obviously you cannot have a human child.

[franky1]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

overpopulated environment?

where?

i see all countries with empty land.. i se many of those countries paid by governments not to grow on it, not to build on it but just sit on the land.

over population/underpopulation is not about there not being physical land. its about politics. governments/bankers put limits on what can be done so that the cause a demand increase in urban areas purely for profit.

its stuff like why is the price of meat expensive.. its not due to animal feed issues or land.. but simply farming quotas
housing shortage is not about land its about politics to only want builders building on 'brown' sites(urban) by building up(apartments/skyscrapers) not outwards

no one needs to create man made islands.. if population was a true environment concern governments would and do just release more land for building on

there is 57mill miles² of land.. 27mill miles² for habitable use

this equates to ~8000metres² per person.... more than enough to build a family house on and sell the rest off as farmland

[BADecker]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

[franky1]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

i feel sorry for your wife if your thinking of having 100billion kids in 9 months
if you even done some math,,
8000m² per person

yep a family of four equates to having enough habitable land for 40 of these

2car garage, outdoor pool, patio area all four sides garden, and a guest house

so selling 39 plots to be used for retail/farming
and this is only in a scenario of single floor living.

[af_newbie]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

[tvbcof]

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

Do you have any specific reasons why that seems like a good number?

[af_newbie]

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

Do you have any specific reasons why that seems like a good number?

Many think we will be out potable water and food when we reach 10 billion.
https://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation

Arable land is already a problem.

I think we will muddle through until 15 billion or thereabouts.   Technological advancements in water purification, desalination, food production will be offset by population rebalancing (from poor, high birth rates to developed, low birth rates countries), and a subsequent spike in energy consumption and an increase in pollution. This will also put pressure on the global population growth rate, which will create more problems as it will decrease the doubling time.

If you want to see what the world will look like in 70 years, take a look at the top 12 dirtiest cities in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-polluted_cities_by_particulate_matter_concentration

This is what Zaozhuang (40th most polluted city) looks like:
https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/the-most-polluted-cities-in-the-world-ranked/14/

Pollution is the biggest threat to the human race, water, land are not far behind, IMHO.  Many people in the developed countries, including people who control the world, ignore the signs because in the West we have a pretty good standard of living and everything is hunky-dory.

[BADecker]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

i feel sorry for your wife if your thinking of having 100billion kids in 9 months
if you even done some math,,
8000m² per person

yep a family of four equates to having enough habitable land for 40 of these
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ee/83/62/ee8362b7cfef4cf9517cc3c196c2e043.jpg
2car garage, outdoor pool, patio area all four sides garden, and a guest house

so selling 39 plots to be used for retail/farming
and this is only in a scenario of single floor living.

I was thinking of 150,000 kids, but my wife opted for a number far less than that.

The point wasn't how many kids anybody might have. The point was and is how many the earth can support. The point wasn't an exact number. The point was to show that with a little innovation, the earth can be made to easily support possibly many times the number presently in existence.

Consider single floor layers, deep underground and high above ground, and in the oceans, as well.

[BADecker]

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

Do you have any specific reasons why that seems like a good number?

Many think we will be out potable water and food when we reach 10 billion.
https://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation

We are barely starting with the technology that can take care of, say, 100 billion. DickDuckGo search on "graphene water filtration" as an example.

[af_newbie]

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

Do you have any specific reasons why that seems like a good number?

Many think we will be out potable water and food when we reach 10 billion.
https://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation

We are barely starting with the technology that can take care of, say, 100 billion. DickDuckGo search on "graphene water filtration" as an example.

100 billion on this planet?  Hmm, I don't see how.

[PryptoMontreal]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

Exactly, Population Control is necessary! And in order to make it possible, government should impose strict laws (such as having a maximum of two children per family) and have a regular check on per family birth rate!
The offenders should be punished in a form of hefty fine!
This infact has been under implementation in a few countries. In my country, this failed miserly, government forced vasectomy after second child and impulsively, the public got furious and started anti-government rallies. This forced government to take the rule back.
Vasectomy was a bad solution, a heavy fine might also not be sufficient, what else could we think of?

[BADecker]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

Exactly, population Control is necessary! And in order to make it possible, government should impose strict laws (such as having a maximum of two children) and have a regular check on per family birth rate!The offenders should be punished in a form of hefty fine!
This infact has been under implementation in a few countries. In my country, this failed miserly, government forced vasectomy after second child and impulsively, the public got furious and started anti-government rallies, thus forcing government to take the rule back. Vasectomy was a bad solution, a heavy fine might also not be sufficient, what else could we think of?

Except that Big Business controls the government. And they are the ones that are causing us to pollute by what they manufacture for us to uses, and the way they manufacture.

Population reduction will be painfully automatic when we start dying off because of pollution. So attempted, formal population control is unnecessary. Cleaning up pollution will only tend to increase population.

[af_newbie]

^^^ Right! And if people decided to build up, or build down, or cover the oceans, and build up and down on the oceans, Earth could easily hold many billions more.

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

Exactly, Population Control is necessary! And in order to make it possible, government should impose strict laws (such as having a maximum of two children per family) and have a regular check on per family birth rate!
The offenders should be punished in a form of hefty fine!
This infact has been under implementation in a few countries. In my country, this failed miserly, government forced vasectomy after second child and impulsively, the public got furious and started anti-government rallies. This forced government to take the rule back.
Vasectomy was a bad solution, a heavy fine might also not be sufficient, what else could we think of?

Changing taxation laws to discourage having kids might work.  Instead, most politicians want more growth and higher birth rates.  Maybe not in Africa, China or India, but in the West that is the case.  Instead of getting rebates, tax credits for having kids, the government should impose additional taxes on families that have kids.  

Education, and some other forms of persuasion to move away from the traditional "spread and multiply" mantra to "find other ways to achieve fulfillment in life" might actually work.

Changing behavior is a difficult thing to do.

[BADecker]

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

Do you have any specific reasons why that seems like a good number?

Many think we will be out potable water and food when we reach 10 billion.
https://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation

We are barely starting with the technology that can take care of, say, 100 billion. DickDuckGo search on "graphene water filtration" as an example.

100 billion on this planet?  Hmm, I don't see how.

Start to get the picture by considering a 2000 sq ft flat for four people... close to the average size of a family. Add another 500 hundred sq ft for utility, for a total of 2500 sq ft.

Use a 7.5 billion estimated population of the world.

This equals out to about 168141 sq miles, which equals out to 16814 square miles if there are 10 stories in each apartment complex.

Land area of the earth is about 57,510,000 sq miles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth). This means we would be using about 0.029% (well under a tenth of a percent) of land area for habitation.

We could easily go up another 10 stories, and down 10 stories. And if we considered the oceans, we would almost have an additional 2.5 times the space.

In an above post, I mentioned graphene water filtration, which can filter saltwater. Also, there are farming techniques that use humic microbes, humic acids, gibberellic acid, and plant nutrients that go way beyond fertilizers for growing plants.

And this isn't all by a long shot. We are barely using what we have available to us. One hundred billion population can easily be handled, if we want to handle it. The problem is working together.

[djsugar]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

Over populated areas lead to scarcity of resources at different levels if not dealt properly. There is fight and increase in prices of land, food and water. Also, healthcare and employment is difficult to serve as demand is high and capital can be less. But there can be some positive outcomes for overpopulated areas like diversity in culture and if we consider a marketplace, more players lead to more competition which leads to competitive pricing and eventually benefits the people.

[samputin]

How to live comfortable in an over populated environment?

My definition of comfortable would be having your own space with all the things you need arranged neatly. It doesn't have to be grand as long as you can move freely at your own pace. You know, just keeping things tidy so that you can rest comfortably despite the environment.

It would be challenging but if there's a will, there's a way. I mean, if you want to feel comfortable somehow, then you should do something about it. There's nothing we can do about the population anymore. You can only change and control yourself. Still, that's my own opinion. We all have different perspectives, after all.

[Spendulus]

The question is not if we can fit billions more.  

The issue is sustainability, pollution control/cleanup, resource (water/air/land/food/energy) management, etc.

I think when we reach 14-15 Billion we will be close to that peak carrying capacity, maybe sooner.

Do you have any specific reasons why that seems like a good number?

Many think we will be out potable water and food when we reach 10 billion.
https://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrying_capacity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation

We are barely starting with the technology that can take care of, say, 100 billion. DickDuckGo search on "graphene water filtration" as an example.

100 billion on this planet?  Hmm, I don't see how.

Ultimately, the planet's human population would be limited by the limit on the conversion of available sunlight to food.