Population rise and downsides

[Upgrade00]

According to the UN population division, there are currently 7,713,468,000 on our planet Earth. And those figures are expected to grow fast to 8.5 billion by 2030, and at the end of the century we would be almost 11 billion.


Not we though, most of us would have passed on by then. How habitable would the world be for 'them', future generations?

Food production would be critical in the survival of our species, and climate change, land degradation, loss of fertility, loss of lands and gradually shift from agriculture doesn't help our chances.

Most of population growth would be happening in developing countries, such as mine Nigeria.
Couple of decades back, agriculture was the main source of livelihood, and each family produced what they consumed, then colonization happened, and brought with it Western Civilization. Now this opened multiple opportunities in industry, and with the discovery of oil, and other minerals, farming moved to the background, now it's the responsibility of a few to feed the whole. This scenario played out in many countries. We all have to take up this responsibility to produce food or at least help sustain the fertility of the earth, especially the oceans.

Internally displaced persons, refugees, and immigrants are also on the rise. Results of war, riots, natural disasters and lack of opportunities due to corruption in many countries. This puts pressure on available land for food and shelter.



One of the upsides of population growth is increase in labour force. If we put our hands together; there maybe a chance.
I believe the deciding factor would be the people in power. We NEED to get them to act.

[1715458201]

1715458201

[iamsheikhadil]

Interesting analysis

What I feel is population growth shouldn't be taken as a negative thing. Population growth means we are gaining more human resources and if that resource is used efficiently, will yield great results!

Results will lead to boundaries getting broken and all of the human species uniting to meet common needs by breaking social barriers.

Growth of atheism will be aggressive and orthodox religious practices will be close to nil.

Only technological advancements may save, like yielding of crops in outer space stations, throwing out garbages in outer space to reserve more place for habitat, purification of sea water whereever possible. On the negative side, there will be huge deforestation.

The technological advancements will not be a dream but will become a need for survival.

And we will achieve it too, just like we did achieve aeroplanes, computer and internet and other technological stuffs

[Upgrade00]

...

Sensitizing the population would also be very important. Most rural areas do not have access to a scanner technology, and they are the worst hit by environmental damage.
We may yet have to look beyond the earth for a lasting solution.

[Juggy777]

According to the UN population division, there are currently 7,713,468,000 on our planet Earth. And those figures are expected to grow fast to 8.5 billion by 2030, and at the end of the century we would be almost 11 billion.


Not we though, most of us would have passed on by then. How habitable would the world be for 'them', future generations?

Food production would be critical in the survival of our species, and climate change, land degradation, loss of fertility, loss of lands and gradually shift from agriculture doesn't help our chances.

Most of population growth would be happening in developing countries, such as mine Nigeria.
Couple of decades back, agriculture was the main source of livelihood, and each family produced what they consumed, then colonization happened, and brought with it Western Civilization. Now this opened multiple opportunities in industry, and with the discovery of oil, and other minerals, farming moved to the background, now it's the responsibility of a few to feed the whole. This scenario played out in many countries. We all have to take up this responsibility to produce food or at least help sustain the fertility of the earth, especially the oceans.

Internally displaced persons, refugees, and immigrants are also on the rise. Results of war, riots, natural disasters and lack of opportunities due to corruption in many countries. This puts pressure on available land for food and shelter.



One of the upsides of population growth is increase in labour force. If we put our hands together; there maybe a chance.
I believe the deciding factor would be the people in power. We NEED to get them to act.

I didn’t knew these stats till your brought them up, on the face of it they look scary however I believe we win when we start to find positivity in a negative situation. While over population is a problem, but as you rightly said we could use that increased labour force into something productive and find a way to survive. What we will need is proper planning from now, so we’re ready when this day comes.

[mersal]

Clearly this world is getting more and more bad place to live when the population increases.Most of the governments are struggling to give employment for all their people which increase poverty and the low standard of living.''If it happens everywhere then this world will become like a war field.

[Jet Cash]

Most of the world population now has no function other than consumer and polluter, and this is why the deep state is trying to create an elite race. They are using vaccination, pharmaceuticals, drug abuse, gender blurring, and war to reduce the populations that are not part of this elite.

[Upgrade00]

Most of the governments are struggling to give employment for all their people which increase poverty and the low standard of living.''If it happens everywhere then this world will become like a war field.

Industrialization is also playing a part. And also improper governing by those in positions of power. Population growth does not have to be a menace, it could be used as a positive if properly managed. We need to also increase family planning sensitization.

...

The earth has so much pollution and exploitation it can take. We all have to realize that it's not indestructible, and drop the idea of; 'not it our lifetime at least', as it's already shortening lifespans and causing damage to out generation.

[Cnut237]

The increasing population is causing immense strain on ecosystems and on certain societies. This is exacerbating climate change, and one thing that really needs to be addressed is intensive farming. As societies develop (thinking particularly of China), they start to develop Western habits and Western consumption patterns. The move towards a meat-heavy diet is one of these changes. Farming of livestock for meat is not sustainable forever, and causes huge environmental damage. I think one consequence of increased population will be a move away from normal meat consumption. We are starting to see it now with the growth of veganism, with a lot of people switching out of environmental concerns.

I think over the next few years we'll see societies moving away from farmed meat consumption and towards both veganism and lab-grown meat. Costs of lab-grown meat are high at the moment largely because there is no scaling effect - as demand rises, prices will fall. Once we hit the point where it is actually cheaper for companies to produce vegan meat alternatives and lab-grown meat, then this may prove a tipping point. It could be in 10 or 20 years that almost no-one eats meat from animals any more. And the environmental benefits could be huge.

So this I think is an example of where increased population makes a problem worse, and so leads to the development and adoption of a solution.

[Upgrade00]

I think over the next few years we'll see societies moving away from farmed meat consumption and towards both veganism and lab-grown meat.

We'll need to become less dependent on many other essentials and minerals, which are exhaustible to effectively support the growth of human life.
In this case I think the rural and developing countries would be worse hit as they'd get left behind as technology advances. Except of course there's a drastic change and improvement in the governance of these states.

[Cnut237]

developing countries would be worse hit

It's a sad fact that developing countries always get worst hit for everything. I'm from the UK, and the history of my country is shameful. The UK built an empire by enslaving and exploiting half the world.

One of the big impacts of an increasing population is that it of course increases demand for all sorts of things, and this exacerbates climate change. Climate change has been caused mostly by the practices of western nations since the industrial revolution... but it is developing countries that experience more of the droughts and famines and extreme weather that is a direct consequence of western behaviour. If it gets worse and reaches the point where half the planet becomes uninhabitable, you can bet that it is the poorest countries that will suffer most.

[Upgrade00]

If it gets worse and reaches the point where half the planet becomes uninhabitable, you can bet that it is the poorest countries that will suffer most.

At some point these countries have to get dependent and start thinking on their feet.
My country, Nigeria for example, is one of the largest producers of oil. While the rest of the world is looking towards other means of driving machines, which are more friendly to the environment and sustainable, we are stuck with oil which is gradually fizzling out.

Of course there are other countries which are direct consequences of external factors, and would need the help of developed Western Nations to curb climate change
We need to find a global solution to turn population rise to a positive.

[gentlemand]

One of the downsides about  population growth is that it puts a big strain on limited resources available which includes food, space, healthcare and a clean water supply. These resources have to be spread over an even larger population, and humans are now cutting down rainforests, polluting the atmosphere and struggling for clean water and healthcare in many areas.

And yet is life for the average human any worse than it was in the 1960s when there were less than half the numbers there are now? No doubt it's still shit for plenty but probably no more or less shit.

If you'd told people a few decades back the population today would be more than double they could not be talked out of a vision of the world as an utter wasteland yet it's still ticking along adequately.

All the same nothing on this planet is infinite. The best thing we can do is make everyone educated and prosperous and then they tend to stop breeding so furiously. By the time large swathes of the world start to live a more 'developed' lifestyle a lot of technologies will have advanced enough for that lifestyle to be way, way less harmful and profligate than it is now.

We may be not too far off peak population.

[roosbit]

Nice piece of information and as far as I know politician's are equally playing their part in making people's lives difficult because of selfishness which has seen corruption on the raise, riots by people showing how unhappy they are by most of these things, immigration in an effort to find a better life elsewhere etc and if things are to change accountability and transparency should be at the core of how we run our daily business.

[TimeBits]

One of the upsides of population growth is increase in labour force. If we put our hands together; there maybe a chance.
I believe the deciding factor would be the people in power. We NEED to get them to act.

No we need to get rid of the people in power, ASAP. Literally they all should of been deleted in 1971. As you can tell, they are all playing dumb. Every day that goes by in this fiat system, they make more bunkers and more drones. We don`t stand a chance. We the people must unite and take over before it is to late. Do not expect the government to help us, They are the reason we are all $laves. They want to keep it this way. Our chances grow slimmer each day we allow them to buy unlimited resources.