Current Events > Why do people think about the far future when there is no future for humanity?

(+) Yeah! (+)

with humans breeding like dogs and the population of humans only going to increase more and more, we'll eventually all die from overpopulation.

Forget robots, flying cars and all that s****. Unless we can invent some kind of far-fantasy space travel crap to go inhabit another planet light years away to ruin some more, humanity is going to die on Earth.
Not to mention with the rate of animals going extinct due to human selfishness, yeah, we're gonna die either way.

Population growth curves follow a logistic curve, capping off at an equilibrium when at carrying capacity.

So, not really, if we are to trust ecology models.
---

eh if we get fusion then I think humanity does have a future.

But no racist, think about it like this, the least educated, and the poorest people are the ones who breed the most.

Rich white people don't have children.

COVxy posted...

Population growth curves follow a logistic curve, capping off at an equilibrium when at carrying capacity.

So, not really.

and none of those people are going to be employable because automation will destroy manufacturing jobs. you're not going to see mass reduction of poverty like we've seen in China.

But yeah, overpopulation is not a problem.

yeah you're right, the world will instantly kill all humans when they hit a certain number, as opposed to the population steadily going down from the lack of resources/whatever until we hit a balance and eventually rise up again.

#justbrainletthings

In the year 2000

In the year two THOUSAND!
---

We need to get rid of all golf courses to make more room for us, golf is fucking stupid.
---

What's funny to me is whenn they grossly underestimate the timespan of future events.

Hand-held laser guns, nonsense energy shields, intersystem drives, thirty alien species, every building on Earth replaced with scifi shiny curved architecture, 2130 AD.
---

DevsBro posted...

What's funny to me is whenn they grossly underestimate the timespan of future events.

Hand-held laser guns, nonsense energy shields, intersystem drives, thirty alien species, every building on Earth replaced with scifi shiny curved architecture, 2130 AD.

in your dreams

Gorbachev posted...

COVxy posted...

Population growth curves follow a logistic curve, capping off at an equilibrium when at carrying capacity.

So, not really.

and none of those people are going to be employable because automation will destroy manufacturing jobs. you're not going to see mass reduction of poverty like we've seen in China.

But yeah, overpopulation is not a problem.

Overpopulation IS a problem when you see that it is the leading cause to all other problems: pollution, environmental destruction and climate change.
And these lead to other issues eventually such as wars and social instability.

Many scientists has been saying for years that the world isn't going to last long with the rate humanity is going at with consumption. But of course no one gives a s*** since that's our great grandchildren's problem, huh?

Asherlee10 posted...

I thought that most of the 1st world countries have been on a population decline?

populations almost never would decline. Only population growth declines.

Asherlee10 posted...

I thought that most of the 1st world countries have been on a population decline?

I don't think so. Immigration is replacing people, or at least, making sure the population isn't decreasing. Japan you can argue is decreasing, but USA, Canada, Australia aren't. EU countries are a bit harder to measure, but depending on their immigration stance, their population will probably end up going up.

Mackorov posted...

Overpopulation IS a problem when you see that it is the leading cause to all other problems: pollution, environmental destruction and climate change.
And these lead to other issues eventually such as wars and social instability.

Many scientists has been saying for years that the world isn't going to last long with the rate humanity is going at with consumption. But of course no one gives a s*** since that's our great grandchildren's problem, huh?

I agree, but people who usually say overpopulation isn't a problem just look at it from that one angle(population growth stops when countries become stable) and fail to look at the big picture.

Premature deindustrialization is one of them that nobody brings up. The economic model that brought China out of poverty? It might be too late for that now.

Like outsourcing manufacturing is no longer a viable option.

Asherlee10 posted...

Gorbachev posted...

fail to look at the big picture.

Which is what?

That he feels fear, mainly.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Which is what?

Mass extinctions, deforestations, global conflict.

The fact that the people who are breeding the most are the most unemployable

Exactly how are we supposed to pull 2 billion people in Africa out of poverty by 2040 when none of them are capable of high skilled work?

The continent is barely literate.

Developed countries are already getting their population growth under control. It's mostly the undeveloped and underdeveloped countries that are contributing most to the issue.

No matter how many America and Europe take in, there will be 100 million + added to the world's population each and every year. We seriously need to start distributing contraceptives, or else we're fucked. Technology and outreach programs are allowing us to artificially prop up our population.

I'm not convinced that we have enough resources to survive long enough to become multiplanetary. Not at the rate of consumption.

COVxy posted...

That he feels fear, mainly.

So exactly how are we going to pull billions of people out of poverty when outsourcing is a dying thing then?

Are we just going to leave India and Africa as is?

I don't think humanity is doomed, I just think either the Chinese or Europe will wipe out most of the population.

Gorbachev posted...

I just think either the Chinese or Europe will wipe out most of the population.

What?

Clad posted...

What?

I mean whoever has the most power in 2050 is going to kill us all.

If Europe does, then everyone else kinda dies.

If China does, then everyone else gets wiped out.

Not enough resources on this world man.

Gorbachev posted...

Clad posted...

What?

I mean whoever has the most power in 2050 is going to kill us all.

If Europe does, then everyone else kinda dies.

If China does, then everyone else gets wiped out.

Not enough resources on this world man.

The only way that's gonna happen is if everyone gets nuked.

I think the more likely outcome is that we'll get population growth under control through some combination of contraceptive distribution and if that's not enough then forced sterility. And I think we'll also see companies that find ways to bring in resources from the asteroid belt and other planets.

Once we become multiplanetary, population growth won't be a huge problem anymore.

It's ironic when you think about it, but world peace will be the death of us all. Remember the old times when humans were busy starting wars with each other all over the planet? When the average lifespan of a person was only like, 25 years old? Dictators, genocides, sufferings...

there is no perfect solution to anything

@COVxy

how are we going to pull nearly 4 billion people out of poverty by 2045?

especially when manufacturing is frequently reshoring?

Asherlee10 posted...

Just seems like a lot of fear-mongering coming from the "The world is going to overpopulate and we're all fucked" crowd.

keep denying it till the day comes. Well, I mean, not like most of us will be alive by then anyway.

Gorbachev posted...

@COVxy

how are we going to pull nearly 4 billion people out of poverty by 2045?

especially when manufacturing is frequently reshoring?

By distributing contraceptives so that the world population decreases on a scale that not even war can achieve.

No no no, we have enough resources to feed everybody.

But we don't have enough resources to make them live even like a lower middle class person from good Europe or America.

Let's all live in a megacity the size of TEXAS.

What could go wrong.

Is climate change too mainstream for you? Why can't you satiate your need for fear with a concern that is...real?
---

COVxy posted...

Is climate change too mainstream for you? Why can't you satiate your need for fear with a concern that is...real.

ITP poverty isn't a real issue.

But don't dodge the question. Answer it, how do we bring people out of poverty, when the main driver of economic growth that actually turned poor countries rich(outsourcing manufacturing) is gone or going away very soon.

And yes, climate change, mass extinction, deforestations are all issues when it comes to overpopulation.

Billions living in poverty is the thing none of you people want to address.

Gorbachev posted...

COVxy posted...

Is climate change too mainstream for you? Why can't you satiate your need for fear with a concern that is...real.

ITP poverty isn't a real issue.

But don't dodge the question. Answer it, how do we bring people out of poverty, when the main driver of economic growth that actually turned poor countries rich(outsourcing manufacturing) is gone or going away very soon.

And yes, climate change, mass extinction, deforestations are all issues when it comes to overpopulation.

Billions living in poverty is the thing none of you people want to address.

People on the far left want to seize 100% of what the first world produces and redistribute it so that everyone has a small percentage. In perpetuity.

I mean, I think the majority of the issues you are just emotionally listing off in a the end of the world is neigh like rant seem to be issues that are traditionally nonissues but sound scary. Nobody is going to speculate about 100 geopolitical issues as if they have the perfect answer, but what I can tell you with absolute certainty is that humanity will come up with one that will suffice, a solution that is at least "good enough". And sure, it could be criticized from four different angles, because there's always criticism and worry, but it'll be good enough to do the job.

Just take a deep breath and think about what issues are actually potentially intractable, and what ones are simply complex.
---

Clad posted...

People on the far left want to seize 100% of what the first world produces and redistribute it so that everyone has a small percentage. In perpetuity.

The world is going to turn far right very soon so that's not going to happen.

I mean very far right. Nobody in Europe is ever going to give up their middle class lives.

COVxy posted...

I mean, I think the majority of the issues you are just emotionally listing off in a the end of the world is neigh like rant seem to be issues that are traditionally nonissues but sound scary. Nobody is going to speculate about 100 geopolitical issues as if they have the perfect answer, but what I can tell you with absolute certainty is that humanity will come up with one that will suffice, a solution that is at least "good enough". And sure, it could be criticized from four different angles, because there's always criticism and worry, but it'll be good enough to do the job.

Er no, I know its huffpaint, but try reading this article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-jasinowski/india-and-africa_b_8697214.html

I am not seeing a pretty picture for India and Africa in the next few decades.

Asherlee10 posted...

He's probably talking about overpopulation, not poverty.

ready, ready.

Overpopulation and poverty go hand in hand.

Overpopulation is the biggest cause of poverty.

Poverty is the biggest cause of overpopulation.

People love to tell me that overpopulation is not a problem. Bullshit. It will cause the biggest mass genocide in human history.

Asherlee10 posted...

Based on what? Your feels?

Have you actually posted anything useful in this topic?

Like anything at all? I could just be fear mongering, yes. But you haven't made any point at all.

The next generation is the last generation that'll even have a planet to live on the way we're going.

May as well make use of it. Maybe see if we can make it to life in space or something.
---

itachi15243 posted...

The next generation is the last generation that'll even have a planet to live on the way we're going.

lmao

Asherlee10 posted...

Sorry, but you just seem like you're emotionally reacting to a something that may not even be that big of a problem. You're overt-excitement isn't helping your case. I'm definitely open to hearing about the issues, but 90% of what you presented in this topic is just an emotional appeal. Give us some facts (with sources).

Gorbachev posted...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-jasinowski/india-and-africa_b_8697214.html

There's definitely a legitimate possibility we will not be seeing India and Africa go through the growth that China did.

And have you not been paying attention to what's been happening to Europe lately? Brexit, and the rise of the far right?

You think because Le Pen lost that means the rise of nationalism is over? All it takes is a bad economy, more migrants, more terrorist attacks and Europe will shift ever rightward. More migrants are pretty much inevitable btw.

Gorbachev posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

He's probably talking about overpopulation, not poverty.

ready, ready.

Overpopulation and poverty go hand in hand.

Overpopulation is the biggest cause of poverty.

Poverty is the biggest cause of overpopulation.

People love to tell me that overpopulation is not a problem. Bullshit. It will cause the biggest mass genocide in human history.

I mean, carrying capacity is directly related to poverty. Like has been said in the topic, when the population reaches carrying capacity, populations tend to level off logistically. You typically do not see animals overpopulate to the point of extinction. They populate to the maximum capacity of the environment, and that constrain keeps the population at equilibrium, either through reduced birth rates or increased death rates. Either way, equilibrium, not extinction.
---

COVxy posted...

I mean, carrying capacity is directly related to poverty. Like has been said in the topic, when the population reaches carrying capacity, populations tend to level off logistically. You typically do not see animals overpopulate to the point of extinction. They populate to the maximum capacity of the environment, and that constrain keeps the population at equilibrium, either through reduced birth rates or increased death rates. Either way, equilibrium, not extinction.

Why are you only answering the questions I know the answer to?

Now, answer the question.

How are we going to pull 4 billion people how of poverty by 2045?

So why even harp the point about overpopulation and poverty when you know it's a nonissue?
---

COVxy posted...

So why even harp the point about overpopulation and poverty when you know it's a nonissue?

Of course its an issue.

There's just too much people in those countries. Mass immigration won't work. We can't immigrate all of India and Africa to rich countries. And those countries are fucked anyways in terms of economics.

Sorry, but there is barely a future for billions of Indians and Africans. And its precisely because there are billions of them they are fucked.

Like if there were only 24 million people in India in 1970, you could have sent them mass migration to the EU, Aus, Canada, US over a matter of decades, and then in 2017, the majority of Indian people would be middle class.

You can't do that because there are 1.2 billion of them, and there is no manufacturing future for them.