this was something people worried about... when the population of the Earth was a 1/10th of what it is today. Most developed countries are struggling to contain a massive obesity epidemic; hardly evidence for a worldwide strain on resources!
The Malthusian trap does not factor in several important variables
-technological growth. Malthus only used amount of land as an indicator of food production. However, modern technology allows for gargantuan farms, selling food expediently halfway across the globe. Technologies such as genetic engineering (don't freak out, farmers have been using it for years) and improved pesticides have lead to massively improved food output per acre. If space eventually does begin to get tight, we can always turn to hydroponic farming, which is the act of growing plants in water only. It is something that can be done in outer space, which in case you haven't heard, has PLENTY of room :)
-variable growth. Another Malthusian trap is that he assumed that people have as many children as they can afford, which would make growth constant. This only occurs in low technology agricultural economies, where farmers need the extra hands. Increasing automation is making the need for large numbers of children unnecessary, and urban dwellers historically never has children to that extent. In fact, in some parts of the civilized world (Europe and Japan) the population is actually declining, as married couples are opting to not have children, or to maybe only have one or two.
2007-04-11 04:52:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Population control is inevitable since we are already growing at a pace that human resources are getting scarce.
2007-04-11 04:24:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by papars 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither. And both. It is no so simple as all one or all the other. For example, the old 1960s book, The Population Bomb predicted a global catastrophe from over population by the 1980s. It never happened,
2007-04-11 04:28:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
it is suspected that controlling factors have been in play already for quite a while
but even so our natural resources and especially food production are reaching critical levels as well as fresh water supplies
people use and need land,so more and more is being changed to accomodate human growth and devellopment
Over the last half century,
Population growth & rising incomes have tripled world grain demand from 640 million tons to 1,855 million
In the near future the global farming community will not be able to feed every body ,food prices will continue to rise. .
and each year pressures on water supplies are increasing with 70 million more people drinking cooking and washing ,not to mention Irrigation for agriculture which consumes 70% of all water supplies
SUGESTED SOLUTIONS
at a meeting in Kopenhagen in 1998 it was suggested to bring the world population down by 60%,one cannot help but wonder at how this would be archieved
population control in the past and present
War (past .present and future)
Natures way disease(today,past and future)
Manufactured disease(suspected today)
cures that kill(suspected today)
poisoned consumer goods (suspected today)
making children infertile or gay,by raising the PH level in drinking water or even drinks (suspected today)
birth control,(in the past the Olmecs women ate yams to make them infertile,today we have several methods but most reach only the educated ,i handed out condoms to an native Mazatecca comunity in oaxaca ,and the church retrieved them all )
education on birth control(not enough,again the poor regions are excluded )
laws that limit childbirth per family(China)
human sacrifice,may be the best option the remains to be used for compost and symbolic titbits(Mayas ,Aztecs,druids)
remember Soylent green ,
2007-04-11 07:50:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, by the looks of just questions on here from 13 year old girls about sex and pregnancy and the lack of parental control and attention we could be smothered in the future. Maybe we will end up like Africa!
2007-04-11 04:25:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Please do not confuse trees with inhabitants improve. In Oregon they have had classes in place because of the fact the 1930's to maintain the forests sustained invariably. this is only been over the final 25 or 30 years that the environmental circulate has stopped the harvest of lumber in the forests and became the forests into something like a thousand million billion matchsticks turning out to be too close collectively waiting for a strike. while you're inquisitive approximately trees, plant some around your place. If everybody did this then the air may well be extra energizing and purifier. As for inhabitants improve, the total thing approximately extensive families has lengthy gone, for the main section, because of value. the only places the place inhabitants improve has lengthy gone wild is the place birth control and options are constrained via societal or financial pressures. while you're inquisitive regarding the human race overrunning the earth, marketing campaign for extra off earth exploration and colonization. Underwater cities are an option in case you are able to think of of a thank you to construct then economically. Stacking cities is yet another decision. Layer upon layer of homes, the poorest residing on the backside. additionally, undergo in strategies, the commonplace public of the planet is unpopulated. Billions of acres on the united states on my own. the appropriate probem confonting us, as a race, is intake and recycling. Too many stuff now are designed to be thrown away whilst they placed on out as a replace of being repaired. the only thank you to shield resourses is to recycle each thing we are able to, dodge burning fuels that reason polution, and use different forms of potential, ie. photograph voltaic, wind, and wave/water potential. There are trillions of BTU's of "unfastened" potential attainable for making use of, if we are able to easily improve a thank you to take great thing approximately them.
2016-10-28 10:33:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, I think the more pertinent question is whether population control is already being used? And I'm not talking just about a limit on children like in China.
2007-04-11 06:04:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by jft1217 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Regardless of population control, we will continue to grow, smother and destroy our resources.
2007-04-11 04:25:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by We Done Yet? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Guilty on both counts. Failure to heed history, and act accordingly.
2007-04-11 11:01:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by jt 5
·
0⤊
0⤋