Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

The need to stop population growth,and the way to go about this

There are loud voices calling for an acceleration of population growth as the only economic solution. Cries that ‘ageing population’ will be too expensive, and other stories that make no sense when examined properly.

But consider the comments of Jeff Bezos on returning from his trip to space. His wealth results from all the people in the world who buy from Amazon. If there were less people in the world, he would have less wealth.

But it not just those few billionaires for whom it is “more people equals more wealth”. The same applies to companies such as Apple, Facebook, Google and Amazon. Not that any of these companies is in a position to influence how people think. And yes, you would think that in an equitable world, more people would also mean more shares and shareholders, so the individual share price and wealth of each shareholder would not change. But it just may be, we don’t live in that equitable world quite yet.

Why wait? We should end population growth NOW! One Finite Planet I have been asked on a few occasions, why not end population growth now? It is not like we need to get more people first? Japan has stopped population growth, why not the rest of us? What are we waiting for?

  • What is needed to stop growth immediately: Births equals deaths.
  • But Japan Has Managed It?
  • Realistically? What Is Soonest Growth Could Stop?
  • What Is The Ideal?
  • Threatening Problem: What Could Prevent The Ideal?

What is needed to stop growth immediately: Births equals deaths.

Fail: Two parents, Two Children Families Takes 3 Generations To Stop.

At first glance, it would seem logical that families had one child for each parent, then population numbers would be stable.

Unfortunately, it is not that simple, and while this works eventually, it takes 3 generations to stop population growth………………..

But Japan Has Managed To Stop Growth?

Japan has already ended national population growth, and has not needed to reduce births to 1 child, but a more reasonable 1.4 average births per women.

How?

The secret is Japan achieved this by starting reducing family sizes earlier. While the two children per family model can take 3 generations, 1.4 children per family does reach the target of stopping growth much sooner, and has the benefit that it can then, if desired, provide a period of population correction. Note Japan has already had around 40 years of less children born every year.

The graphs on this page  [on original] tell the story of ending population growth:  ….

Realistically? What Is Soonest Growth Could Stop?

Globally, births per woman is currently still at around 2.3, having fallen from around 6.0 prior to 1900, when infant mortality was still high. We have had a population explosion triggered by a fall in infant mortality, but the explosion is now ending.

If the word follows the path of Japan, it could still take another 35 years before the population is decreasing, and if we follow some UN projections where having fallen to 2.3, births per woman stops falling, it population growth could persist until the end of the century, provided the resulting numbers themselves don’t cause a disaster.

Realistically, even if you do accept that the fact we are unable to exist sustainably means we are overpopulated , without a massive intervention, the very fact that population of elderly people is so much smaller because they were born when population was smaller, means population keeps growing for at least another 10 years.

What Is The Ideal.

Personally, despite the fact we are already overpopulated, I believe any disruption so severe as to halt growth right now is likely to reduce the planets carrying capacity of humans, and make overpopulation an even worse problem even without having more people.

Ending growth smoothly in 10 or even 20 years I think is the best we could hope to achieve.

Threatening Problem: What Could Prevent The Ideal?

There are loud voices calling for an acceleration of population growth as the only economic solution. Cries that ‘ageing population’ will be too expensive, and other stories that make no sense when examined properly.

But consider the comments of Jeff Bezos on returning from his trip to space. His wealth results from all the people in the world who buy from Amazon. If there were less people in the world, he would have less wealth.

But it not just those few billionaires for whom it is “more people equals more wealth”. The same applies to companies such as Apple, Facebook, Google and Amazon. Not that any of these companies is in a position to influence how people think. And yes, you would think that in an equitable world, more people would also mean more shares and shareholders, so the individual share price and wealth of each shareholder would not change. But it just may be, we don’t live in that equitable world quite yet.

Anyone who believes in indefinite growth in anything physical, on a physically finite planet, is either mad or an economist.”ATTRIBUTED TO KENNETH BOULDING IN: UNITED STATES. CONGRESS. HOUSE (1973)  HTTPS://ONEFINITEPLANET.ORG/2021/11/05/END-POPULATION-GROWTH-NOW/COMMENT-PAGE-1/?UNAPPROVED=781&MODERATION-HASH=AA2A290874C6DDED0D00BF8B5DE29F79#COMMENT-781

November 6, 2021 - Posted by | Uncategorized

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: