How Many People Can The Earth Support?

[JLM]

How do you handle this?

??? By increasing longevity to the point, where the danger of having no survivors is drastically reduced?

Lack of food increases the death rate.

How would you get food into N. Korea and distribute it without you and those you are trying help being shot?

Which high lights the point that we have to start where it's easiest & delegate some country like Russia to deal with North Korea.

 

[Corduroy]

Perhaps you can. Why can we now support 7 billion? Better technology. Presumably technology will continue to improve, and as a bunch of us fascist bastards have said, we have all the matter and all the energy we've ever had. All we need to do is figure out new and better ways to exploit them.

I should have been more clear. I meant we can't support today's population with today's consumption and today's technology indefinitely. There is of course the possibility of technological improvements and some are easily foreseen.

 

[petros]

Which tech? A huge chunk of the world still hasn't hit the steam age.

 

[Corduroy]

ISupport 7 billion??????????????????????????? From what I can gather 5 or 10 thousand are dying of starvation every day!

Current food production can support even more than 7 billion. People die of starvation because food is not equally distributed. Some places produce more, some less, some waste a ton, some even export food while the population is starving.

I'm middle aged and the Earth's population has tripled in my lifetime, so far. This geometric rate of growth will lead us to some sort of catastrophe and soon.

The population will not grow at the same rate it currently grows, or at increasing rates of growth. Taking current growth and projecting it into the future is how you lie with statistics. Growth patterns have changed. Fertility rates around the world are dropping. Population may continue to grow but at a slower rate. We can't really predict if this will be sustained or if it will change.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Helping one's fellow man?

Yeah. Because that's a big priority with the ultra-rich.

How do you ensure that the cargo ship of wheat sent to feed the masses isn't sold on the open market by the ruling warlords?

You can't. Therefore we shouldn't send any aid to anybody. Because warlords!

 

[captain morgan]

??? By increasing longevity to the point, where the danger of having no survivors is drastically reduced?

Lack of food increases the death rate.

Thanks for the solution on this... I honestly don't know how it has escaped the brightest minds for this long.

I'll be certain to call up the UN and tell 'em that the solution to starvation is to 'just feed them'

You can't. Therefore we shouldn't send any aid to anybody. Because warlords!

Why not spare the Earth a bunch of global warming by eliminating the need of sending cargo ships all over hell and gone by just sending the cash directly to the despots and warlords.

What with the ice caps melting an all, at least we've thought of the children

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Why not spare the Earth a bunch of global warming by eliminating the need of sending cargo ships all over hell and gone by just sending the cash directly to the despots and warlords.

Pretty much what Reagan did.

What with the ice caps melting an all, at least we've thought of the children

Glad you covered that, means I don't have to.

 

[captain morgan]

Pretty much what Reagan did.

Good, then at least we've done everything possible to stem the incidence of starvation in the world.

Glad you covered that, means I don't have to.

Melting of the ice caps is #1 on my to do list

 

[petros]

The earth is our underwire, it supports us but we may have to get a bigger cup size.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Good, then at least we've done everything possible to stem the incidence of starvation in the world.



Melting of the ice caps is #1 on my to do list

Here's an idea. How bout we get Halliburton and Bechtel to distribute aid? Because when the government gives aid, that's "wasting the taxpayers' money," but when the government gives taxpayers' money to a corporation to give aid, that's "free enterprise" and "entrepreneurship." And you can be damn sure Halliburton and Bechtel won't let any pipsqueak warlords get their hands on the money or supplies. They do not like unwashed barbarians taking a cut of their graft. . . um. . . "overhead."

 

[JLM]

Thanks for the solution on this... I honestly don't know how it has escaped the brightest minds for this long.

I'll be certain to call up the UN and tell 'em that the solution to starvation is to 'just feed them'

If you think it will do any good! I'd have thought they'd have stumbled upon this solution a couple of years back.

 

[Walter]

Which tech? A huge chunk of the world still hasn't hit the steam age.

No. Very few haven't been industrialized.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Hi, Waltard!

 

[captain morgan]

Here's an idea. How bout we get Halliburton and Bechtel to distribute aid? Because when the government gives aid, that's "wasting the taxpayers' money," but when the government gives taxpayers' money to a corporation to give aid, that's "free enterprise" and "entrepreneurship." And you can be damn sure Halliburton and Bechtel won't let any pipsqueak warlords get their hands on the money or supplies. They do not like unwashed barbarians taking a cut of their graft. . . um. . . "overhead."

Do Haliburton and Betchel have the direct lines to the despots?

That would certainly be an efficiency

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Do Haliburton and Betchel have the direct lines to the despots?

That would certainly be an efficiency

Of course they do. On their speed dials.

 

[Curious Cdn]

Current food production can support even more than 7 billion. People die of starvation because food is not equally distributed. Some places produce more, some less, some waste a ton, some even export food while the population is starving.



The population will not grow at the same rate it currently grows, or at increasing rates of growth. Taking current growth and projecting it into the future is how you lie with statistics. Growth patterns have changed. Fertility rates around the world are dropping. Population may continue to grow but at a slower rate. We can't really predict if this will be sustained or if it will change.

Maybe, that is true. Time will tell. We are all living a lot longer than we did just a few generations ago (even in the poorer corners of the Earth,) and our growth will be considerable for some time. Maybe 12 billion is the end number at the end of the century. What would the point of that be? Let's reproduce ourselves until we are all miserable and life is poor for everyone.

 

[55Mercury]

unfortunately the future of the planet is the last thing people are thinking about when they're fvcking.

 

[Curious Cdn]

unfortunately the future of the planet is the last thing people are thinking about when they're fvcking.

We have all sorts of means at hand to control our fertility and lots more could be developed. It is rapidly becoming a survival strategy to do so.

 

[CDNBear]

 

[lone wolf]

I hear government will issue Hydro securities bonds to volunteers as they step off the planet