World population is growing 20 million people every 3 months

[valhalla360]

[QUOTE=boatman61;2361866]Originally Posted by boatman61
In the good years the fox will breed twice however in bad years they cut down to once.. sadly you just have to go to India for example to see humans think that the more they breed the greater the chance their genes will survive and continue.
The natural world is smarter than us in many ways..
There is one thing we have in common with the fox.. the senseless killing frenzy when we get into the hen house.


Valhalla[quote]
Actually, the statistics show humans doing the exact opposite. The wealthiest countries (ie: those having good years) tend to have the lowest population growth. The poorest countries (ie: those having bad years) tend to have the highest population growth.

I think that's what I said..

No, if your theory worked, Western Europe, USA, Austraila and a couple other very wealthy countries would be having 8-12kids per woman on average as there is drastically more wealth compared to India on a per capita basis, yet we see the opposite. The highest population growth happens in the poorest countries.

Also from a purely evolutionary perspective, having more kids does increase the odds of your genes passing on.

[Blue Stocking]

Originally Posted by Wotname

I seem to recall the most animal populations expand until they exhaust their food supply or their habitat is altered so much that they can no longer survive.

No reason to expect we (humans) are any different.

This is taking place worldwide now. Its just that we are changing the habitats deliberately by war and politics, hence immigration !!

[daletournier]

In regards to no growth in consumption Dh I'd suggest your correct but not because people don't want to consume as much or marketers aren't doing their best to help us consume its more along the lines of the disposal income we had is drying up. If you look at house prices for example ,the ratio of house price vs income is alot different now than 30 years ago. In the 90's outer suburbs of melb it was approx 3:1 where as now its closer to 10:1. A greater percentage of ones wages goes towards servicing debt. Now credit has helped enormously fuel consumption in the last 20years but there becomes a point when servicing debt takes away that disposal income. I believe there is more desire today for stuff than ever before. Consumption is still huge just not growing enough to support the system.
In regards to the demographics in the western world yes we have reached that demographic cliff which is a big problem, we have to many old people and not enough people at the prime spending age which I believe to be 30-45ish? Combine this with the debt burdens both private and sovereign and we have a problem because consumption must grow or our fractional banking system faulters, our economy depends on never ending growth. Why do you think there's been 700 and something central bank interest cuts around the world in the last 9 years? Negative intetest rates? And many rounds QE and corporate bond buying? this is a huge attempt to stimulate growth. Consumerism is debt driven and we have to much debt and not enough inflation to shrink it.
Im certainly no expert but I don't believe demographics are an issue in countries the like of India and Indonesia to name a couple of hugely populated ones. Our demographic problem is more a western society issue, and the worlds population is more than us.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[boatman61]

[QUOTE=valhalla360;2361870][QUOTE=boatman61;2361866]Originally Posted by boatman61
In the good years the fox will breed twice however in bad years they cut down to once.. sadly you just have to go to India for example to see humans think that the more they breed the greater the chance their genes will survive and continue.
The natural world is smarter than us in many ways..
There is one thing we have in common with the fox.. the senseless killing frenzy when we get into the hen house.


Valhalla

Actually, the statistics show humans doing the exact opposite. The wealthiest countries (ie: those having good years) tend to have the lowest population growth. The poorest countries (ie: those having bad years) tend to have the highest population growth.

No, if your theory worked, Western Europe, USA, Austraila and a couple other very wealthy countries would be having 8-12kids per woman on average as there is drastically more wealth compared to India on a per capita basis, yet we see the opposite. The highest population growth happens in the poorest countries.

Also from a purely evolutionary perspective, having more kids does increase the odds of your genes passing on.

Actually W Europe has a lower birth rate because there's high unemployment.. the only area's that have a high birth rate are the immigrant communities where the programming has not had time to change.. and they come West for the relatively higher wage than the East EU countries can afford.. and to support those larger families.
My comparison choice of India was to demonstrate the poor country does not compensate.

[daletournier]

Sorry one other thing, im not sure a shortage of labor will be the big problem. I was reading something by Elon Musk the other day regarding the coming explosion of robotics and automation , there is most likely going to be to much available labor regardless of what happens with population, theres some scary figures out there. This also lends some weight to universal basic income. The western demographics (and in the future china) once again is more a consumption (spending) issue than a labor issue.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[daletournier]

[QUOTE=boatman61;2361876][QUOTE=valhalla360;2361870]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Originally Posted by boatman61
In the good years the fox will breed twice however in bad years they cut down to once.. sadly you just have to go to India for example to see humans think that the more they breed the greater the chance their genes will survive and continue.
The natural world is smarter than us in many ways..
There is one thing we have in common with the fox.. the senseless killing frenzy when we get into the hen house.


Valhalla

Actually W Europe has a lower birth rate because there's high unemployment.. the only area's that have a high birth rate are the immigrant communities where the programming has not had time to change.. and they come West for the relatively higher wage than the East EU countries can afford.. and to support those larger families.
My comparison choice of India was to demonstrate the poor country does not compensate.

Also social security safety nets play a big role coupled with education.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[daletournier]

http://www.unfpa.org/world-population-trends

Btw they are guessing?'so much for facts. The UN does their population projections every two years and often they have to adjust because the population grows more than they projected. Will it be huge increase, a little increase or will it go backwards? No one knows. But I'll back nature.

The other think I want to know is who counts all the births in places like Indonesia (17,000 islands) an Philippines (7,000 ,islands) , thousands of villages, they're not driving to hospitals to give birth. I can't believe its even close to accurate.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[rognvald]

Despite the current reversing trend in Asian population growth-- Africa and Asia will continue to produce the most offspring per capita in the future. The greatest population declines will be in European and North American populations. Follows is an excellent morphing graph in "Market Watch" showing these changes in world population demographics. Good luck and safe sailing.

The massive shift coming in world population, captured in one animation - MarketWatch

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by brownoarsman

I don't think a population 'unit' will matter so much in the years ahead. With machines replacing people, or greatly enhancing their productivity, production could easily be divorced from population. This is more likely in the West with higher wages already.

It's our only hope.

[brownoarsman]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

It's our only hope.

Well, that and maybe some singapore-style demographic controls. It's hard to see a Universal Basic Income working with continued population growth. The Gulf countries tried it ...

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by brownoarsman

Well, that and maybe some singapore-style demographic controls. It's hard to see a Universal Basic Income working with continued population growth. The Gulf countries tried it ...

I cant see it working for many reasons but there are more trials popping up and more media talk about its introduction.
Most people need work, its a important part of identity and gives meaning, usefulness to ones life.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[John Drake]

The actual UN data:

https://esa.un.org/Unpd/wpp/Publicat...s_WPP_2015.pdf

The key findings are that the world population will reach 9.7 billion by 2050.

At that point, there is no future prediction. Only three possibilities: Population continues to climb, moderately. It stays level. Or declines.

In 2012, the National Geographic devoted it's entire January issue to the subject. The world population hit 7 billion then. In that journal, the predicted outcome was more dire (and more plausible). Population numbers will pass 9 billion by 2050 and then crash down to 6 billion.

That is A LOT of people. Anyone remember the four horsemen of the apocalypse? Disease, war, famine, death.

Do a little research and some interesting numbers pop up. The amount of arable land to feed one person on a western diet: about 2 acres. The amount of arable land on earth today, divided by the population: about 2 acres.

Climate change may bring significant change 90 years from now (if ever). 2050, is only 33 years away.

Good luck to us all.

[This makes the Pardey's philosophy, "Go small, go now" even more compelling. Conserve your resources, live your dreams. The future is assured for no one.]

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by UAEguy

A simple math lesson for Adelie and the MENSA guys

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-log_plot

A straight line on a semilog graph of y versus x represents an exponential function of the form
y = a e^( b x).

I did miss that it was a semi-log graph and it would be good point if any of them were straight lines.

[brownoarsman]

Originally Posted by daletournier

I cant see it working for many reasons but there are more trials popping up and more media talk about its introduction.
Most people need work, its a important part of identity and gives meaning, usefulness to ones life.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

No question, work provides purpose. Without work, we see a lot of social ills: drug use, teenage pregnancy, high fertility rates in general, etc. Humans are terrible at giving up short-term benefits for long term gains, which is why I think any UBI system has to go hand-in-hand with population control.

Of course the Utopian ideal is that with a UBI, everyone wears robes, writes poetry, and creates intimately crafted wood carvings. Keynes had the fascinating theory that with higher productivity, people would just work less to enjoy more free time for those pursuits, which of course we did not see happen then. In the higher income, educated segments, I could see that happening today given the constant gripes about being 'busy,' but more broadly, probably not.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by daletournier

In regards to no growth in consumption Dh I'd suggest your correct but not because people don't want to consume as much or marketers aren't doing their best to help us consume its more along the lines of the disposal income we had is drying up. If you look at house prices for example ,the ratio of house price vs income is alot different now than 30 years ago. In the 90's outer suburbs of melb it was approx 3:1 where as now its closer to 10:1. A greater percentage of ones wages goes towards servicing debt. Now credit has helped enormously fuel consumption in the last 20years but there becomes a point when servicing debt takes away that disposal income. I believe there is more desire today for stuff than ever before. Consumption is still huge just not growing enough to support the system.. . .

I didn't mean to say that consumption is not going up. I mean to say that consumption of stuff is not going up. Consumption increases whenever there is growth of income. In advanced countries, almost all this growth is in the consumption of services and, especially, "experiences" -- like travel, entertainment, etc. Cruising is "experience" by the way.

House prices are just a simple matter of supply and demand. Demand is driven by available income and available credit. We buy more expensive houses because we can, and we don't have much choice in places where there are restrictions of supply of developable land, like around London, and the Bay Area.

As to "desire" for stuff -- sure. It's human nature. But it's a fact that we are not consuming more and more of it. Have you ever heard of "peak stuff"? See: Have we reached 'peak stuff'?.

We have reached it in many advanced countries, just like we reached peak food consumption a century or so ago. Now we are moving on to spending money on other things, besides physical goods.