We hear of over-population;could world under-population occur?

Question

If the world human population began falling rapidly, due to ecological disaster or disease, without any other physical damage to the world, at what point would our numbers be too low to sustain the world economy and civilization?

Answer 1

Very good questions. I bet a few good statisticians could give some intelligent insight.

I understand that population issues are cropping up in places like China, Japan, France.... Not enough people are getting married or having people... The concern is that this will lead to a future decline in these country's populations... and therefore a decline in the economies.

With the big scare regarding Avian Flu (considering how decimated the American population was when it hit back in 1916), it's even more important to consider what such widespread disaster could mean to those who survive.

You will have the mature, intelligent people who will strive for continuity of civilization... and then you will have the mindless immature people who will mob and rise up in civil unrest (the L.A. riots come to mind).

It would seem to me that there would be conerns regarding martial law in some places... and fears of tyrants rising up and taking over other governments that haven't protected themselves from such a situation... if that's even truly possible in such an advanced state of disaster (the protection, that is). What all that would do to the economy? It would change things dramatically... and if the wrong people came into control in the wrong places, it could devastate a lot of the survivors.

Boy.... I'm going to be pondering THIS one for a long time.... thanks for a thought provoking question.

Answer 2

I've read that in an isolated environment (like an interstellar space ship or space station), you'd need a few thousand people to sustain an acceptable genetic variation (i.e. prevent inbreeding). The absolute minimum was something like 760 but then noone could die and everyone had to produce children.

If the world population dropped significantly, world trade would take a major hit, I guess... but everyone could then live off the land. We'd be starting over as farmers.

Answer 3

No. We will not become underpopulated. Homosexuals ALSO have children. Not usually in the SAME way heterosexual couples get pregnant, but gay couples DO have children. A donor is still a donor. Besides, there are all of those stupid christian organizations feeding overpopulated countries but not stopping the breeding because THE CHRISTIANS have enforced their beliefs there, too about not using birth controls! I think that helping to feed and support an overpopulated, disease-ridden place is criminal lunacy. Nothing healthy comes from it.

Answer 4

After this coming war, yes, I think we could be underpopulated. And mother nature's always out to keep our population under control with things like west nile and avian flu.

Didn't want to say homosexuality too, but I have to. Not that I'm against it, but it's pretty clear evidence that we have evolved to that point to keep our numbers in check without killing ourselves.

Answer 5

It happens greater or less each and every 20,000 years, for the time of international huge Ice an prolonged time, i think of we are greater or less 2 or 3 thousand years from our next one. optimistically this time we are able to have the skill to make it off planet nevertheless. Or we'd decide to not in view it quite is the way our planet works... heh.

Answer 6

It is about time that someone asked a thought provoking question. It is the sign of an intelligent thinker. Good job! That question is really a brain worker.

Answer 7

This is the best question I've read all day. Very thought provoking. I have no idea what the answer is, but I'm going to research it. Thanks for asking an intelligent question.

Answer 8

This would never happen. Because of one demographic...Red Necks.