I think we have exceeded it, if you want to figure the long term, sustainable population. That is, for everyone on the planet to have a decent standard of living, and not damage the next generations' right to have an equally good standard of living, we already have way too many people. Technology will, perhaps too slowly, correct some of the problems. But many of them require changes of attitude and government policies, and not just technology. To leave slack for the inevitable less than perfect efficiency, we should have about half the population we currently have.
We not only need creative solutions to sustainable development, but creative and compassionate solutions to the population increase. Personally, I believe sufficiently in Liberty that I do not want them to be government solutions.
But I will point out that making effective birth control available at no cost to ANYONE who wants it would be a great step forward. If this cannot be done by private foundations, and must be done by governments, the result will be forced use of birth control, a huge invasion of privacy and loss of liberty, rebellion and chaos.
2007-06-04 13:14:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by auntb93 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Have you ever flown across any Continent or country? I have, and you can look down at miles and miles and miles of empty land. The world is not over populated like some claim. The entire earth's population would fit inside of an area the size of Texas with room to spare!
2007-06-04 20:19:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by self_is_steam 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think there is a some-what balance, of births and deaths over a period of time, but yes, the Earth is getting crowded. I am not saying the US should do this, but in very populated places like China, they limit births to control population. I think, from what I have heard, it seems to be ok there? I know that if a serious problem does arise, our nations' leaders will find a way to solve it!
2007-06-04 20:11:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by ilove_california3 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
The latest estimates of carrying capacity I've heard are around 10 billion but that number is subject to revision.
2007-06-04 20:12:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope. There are states in the U.S. alone that are under-populated.
In fact, the U.S. Government pays subsidies to farmers to stop them from growing too much food. We have space and food capacity for many, many more people. And that is just the U.S. alone. Other countries have even more room.
2007-06-04 20:11:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I would say about 20 billion before society breaks apart at the seams
2007-06-04 20:08:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Samantha 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
um, i believe scientist predict the world population support limit is like.....around 8-9 billion people?
which isnt that far off
2007-06-04 20:08:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
that's a very interesting question! is there such a number and what will happen when we reach it? i think that we won't reach it because there's always some disease, plague, natural disaster, etc. that keeps the numbers in the acceptable range.
2007-06-04 20:11:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by annie 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
probably not quite,in another 10-15 yes,but right now no.In the mean time we as people need to figure out how to get to other planets and make the other planets habitable.
2007-06-04 20:09:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by Maurice H 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There's still some room in Russia.
Uh.. and Antarctica? Guess we'll have to kick the penguins out though...
2007-06-04 20:08:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Eldritch 5
·
0⤊
0⤋