Do you think that problems like WAR, Terrorism, Church & State, Environment, and Violence in schools could all be taken care of much more easily if people just stopped having babies for a minute?
Could we all just decide to go 1 year without having babies and that would take care of most of the problems?
I think so.
2007-07-10 09:21:05 · 6 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Agree partially... I think religion has a lot to do as well. Even centuries ago when Earth was not so populated, there were still many wars fought and most of them were over religious disagreements.
The problem is that the people reproducing the most are the ones that shouldn't... ie. poor and uneducated ppl living off welfare or other govt handouts, unmarried teens, ppl living in crack neighborhoods, etc....
2007-07-10 19:37:15 · answer #1 · answered by kitty98 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do think overpopulation has a lot to do with it. But you would have to go longer than just 1 year to fix the problem. To be honest you would have to limit families to 1 child for several generations to get back down to a reasonable range.
I believe on Sunday I saw 60 minutes where 2 children were in a foster care center. There mother was dead from drugs, and there father had 10 other children. He had no job, and couldn't support them.
This is in America mind you. I mean a lot of us love the gift of life, and probably don't mind the process that starts it, but overpopulation is really killing the world.
More people means we need more room, more fuel, more jobs, more food, more government. Because of this the environment is suffering, people are more likely to go to war over territory, money, and fuel.
I think we would be better off as a race on whole if we concentrated on technology to improve living conditions, to get the most out of the least (land wise, fuel wise, etc.), improved our health conditions, and cut back on reproducing.
Sadly the problem will only get worse, as the average life expectancy continues to rise (it was just 36 about 200 years ago, not it's double). In another 100 years when humans have developed the medicine to live for 200 years what's to be expected? Less people dying, more people giving birth. Sounds like a formula for disaster.
2007-07-10 16:32:15 · answer #2 · answered by boilerupvic 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The decline of human population has been even more dramatic over the last 6 years. In 1994 we added 78.5 million more people, this year we will add 60.1 million. This is a decline of 3 million less people added per year. If we maintain this 6 year average of 3 million less people added per year, we will peak in population reaching zero population growth in 2020 with 6.64 billion people.
--- Unfortunately, we see population growth among the people least equipped to take responsibility.
2007-07-10 16:37:55 · answer #3 · answered by Menehune 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Amen. This place is getting way too crowded. Everybody needs to chill, and give eachother a little more room. Nowadays I have to go miles to find a vacant lot or field, whereas our forefathers could get a good game of baseball going right there on their own street.
2007-07-10 16:25:47 · answer #4 · answered by conventional 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it's a huge part of our problems and I'm amazed that none of the global warming people talk about more people equals more global warming.
2007-07-10 16:25:49 · answer #5 · answered by Sean 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
well your wrong, Malthus
2007-07-10 16:24:13 · answer #6 · answered by fourthy27 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋