From what I've read, the overall population of the earth is actually going down, even in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Many countries do not have sustainable reproduction rates, with some like Japan and much of Europe trying to figure out how on earth they are going to care for their elderly. Abortion has something to do with this, even in the US, since 1/3 of babies are killed before birth, but even in places where this is discouraged or outlawed, there are still fewer babies born than there were a few decades ago. Even in the most fertile areas, numbers per family have generally gone down from 8 or more to 5 or 6, and seem on a further downward trajectory. Few places in the US, Europe, or Oriental countries currently have replacement numbers, unless there are many immigrants, and even then, they are barely holding even.
I do think there have been significant increases in nutrition and agriculture apart from GMOs and other problems to sustain what we currently have reasonably well. I also think there are serious problems that come about when a population decreases dramatically. (For an example, look at the political and social upheaval that resulted from the Black Plague across most of the world in the 1300s--1/3 to 1/2 of the population died, more in some areas, and it led to the destruction of the feudal system.) OTOH, I do think for each person or family, it's worth thinking about what environmental consequences our decisions will have in a few generations, as well. I don't think there are easy answers for these things, but it seems to me that a knee-jerk reaction in either direction is likely to not work well, in the end.
[QUOTE=eKatherine;1112631]So you are suggesting that we should encourage overpopulation as an experiment to see if there is infinite arable land that can be both farmed and have housing built on it at the same time, as so often I have heard suggested?
Most arable land is already being farmed.
Arable land is the most desirable and profitable for building housing.
Once arable land has housing built on it, it will never be farmed again.
A population increase results in demand for more housing.[/QUOTE]
Sure, if you only think in square footage, if you think in cubic footage...
[QUOTE=DavidBrennan;1113145]The videos are accurate and I suspect the myth of overpopulation is a media ruse to depopulate white people, whom they hate.
It was interesting last year observing the mainstream media celebrate that [URL="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303879604577408363003351818.html"]2011 was the first year[/URL] ever where there were more blacks and Hispanics born than whites in the U.S., and the mainstream media widely celebrate this as a "milestone for diversity" and America "overcoming white privilege", etc., etc. Conversely, anytime a white dares to have children the media calls them "selfish" and cries for government to sterilize people begin anew.
The late, great Michael Crichton did a good deal documenting the media-concocted lies and stupid premises ([I]"resource consumption increases symmetrically with raw numbers"[/I] which is something that has never been true in the history of the species) of overpopulation. His speech, [URL="http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/main/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/2818/Crichton-Environmentalism-is-a-religion.aspx"]'Environmentalism as a Religion'[/URL] is just one place to get some perspective.
I suppose the bottom line with having families, though, just like with the paleo diet, is this: If you agree with it, do it. If not, don't. It's each individual's own personal business, and nobody else's.[/QUOTE]
Thread got a lot more interesting here...