Do a little research on world population growth rates.Do you foresee your findings to be a possible societal problem in the future, and if so, why? Do you not see your findings as particularly problematic, and if so, why?
And the million dollar question.....what solutions would you suggest?!
Hi Judith :)
ReplyDeleteOur world growth rate seems to be increasing exponentially, with our current estimated population at about 6.8 billion people. A reason that the world’s growth rate has grown so considerably is partially due to the notable drop in the world’s death rate. The Industrial Revolution played a salient role in this difference, improving the standard of living for many families and leading to the development of better sanitation and the creation of dependable food supplies. This led to people living longer lives and therefore to more inhabitants on earth.
However, this intense growth is arousing an alarming concern for the possibility of overpopulation of our planet in the future. With more and more people continually being born on the planet and less people dying, the Earth may become pushed over the edge of it’s capacity; leading to problems such as resource depletion (not enough natural resources to effectively sustain the world’s population), limited living space, and a dearth of food and water. No population can grow exponentially indefinitely; there has got to be a stopping point.
One of the ways that this crisis of overpopulation can be adverted is through widespread awareness and education. In many less socioeconomically developed countries, there is a strong correlation between the education level of women and population growth rate. Those who have had very little to no education tend to be the ones that have more children, often due to unprotected sex. This can also be correlated to a lack of contraceptives; women getting pregnant because they do not have access to or the money to pay for condoms and birth control. One solution, although slightly controversial, would be to hold conventions where they give away free condoms or to have free condoms available at a certain location at all times. Another way would be to increase family planning and reduce the cost of birth control as well as make it more easily accessible to the public. To address all of these issues, there should be more widespread education about the effects of overpopulation on our planet. This can be achievable through awareness ads, conventions, and even by having high school and college students take an environmental science class (which covers the topics of overpopulation and resource depletion) as a mandatory requirement.
Piper Miller (Block 4)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello Judith! :)
ReplyDeleteThe world population growth rates seem to be very different in many countries. In the United States, the growth rate continues to highly increase while in other countries like Germany growth rate is decreasing. In fact, the growth rate in most European countries is negative. However, Asian and African countries hold the highest growth rates. There are many experiments and calculations done to estimate how long it will take for each countries population to double in size. The world's current growth rate is about 1.14%. This includes natural and overall growth rate. Natural growth rate exemplifies the births and deaths only, while overall growth rate includes migration.
High population growth usually creates a problem for the country. With more people the need for consumption is also higher. This results in bigger needs for things like food, jobs, homes, stores, and other duties.
I do foresee my findings to be a possible societal problem in the future. Like stated above, with more people in the world, countries will become overpopulated and become corrupt. There is not going to be enough supplies and utilities for which every human needs to function and everything will be scarce. People will begin to fight for things before they run out. In addition to simple nature growth rates increase, more and more people are moving to countries which already have high growth rates for better opportunities and lifestyles which can cause corruption in the country. Finally, the death rate has been decreasing. Therefore, more people are being born, migrating, and less people are dying causing a huge increase in the population at a very fast pace.
There are many reasons why some countries are overpopulating, however the biggest problem is breeding. While we all want to have a family and kids, some people take this to an advantage. Having unprotected sex and not being educated causes people to have babies which they can't even afford to take care of. The most important thing we can do is educate the young to prevent them from growing up and making mistakes like many in the past. It is necessary to provide condoms and pills for any needs. For example, China has made a law where they have stopped allowing families to have over a certain amount of children per house hold because of overpopulation. While most may think this is not right, people have to understand that overpopulation can corrupt a country and at that point your family won't even matter because people will be hungry, jobless, unhealthy, and slowly dying.
Another reason for overpopulation is immigration. Many countries during this time and ever since we can remember, have been in trouble and therefore people escape and come to the better lands. United States has the biggest population of immigrants. Although, it is good that they want a better life because who wouldn't some things have to be worked out to stop this. If we have the power to make a better nation, instead of using our given space which will soon run out, we should go to other troubled countries and help there so that people can stay in their homelands and still live freely. If we as a world do not come together and help each other out, overpopulation will just become a bigger problem over the years and will eventually create a problem for all countries.
Izabella Szura
Block 2
Mrs. Hurst,
ReplyDeletePopulation is increasing steadily in most parts of the world, with an estimated total population of 6.8 Billion.This number is not sky rocketing but it is growing considerably fast. Throughout the time that humans have inhabited the earth there have been rapid peaks in population increase as well as severe decreases, all occurring natural. I do agree that population is increasing at an uncomfortably steady rate for most people and scientist are worried that we are becoming over populated and will soon eliminate all supplies we need to survive. But I strongly disagree with this hypothesis. I believe that the earth has its own ways to increase, stabilize, or decrease the populations. Wether it be a natural disaster, a deadly disease such as AIDS, or a world wide catastrophe. All of these things can put a huge wrench in the way population is growing today, and I believe that this is the natural way that population growth will be dealt with.These types of situations are considered devastating to the human population because no one wants to be a victim of such an unfortunate thing, but we are merely creatures on this earth, and we must learn that it is impossible to control everything to get the outcome we believe is right. I do think that it's important to inform people around the world of the devastation we unknowingly cause to the earth and our resources, and how we can protect them. But most people in the world don't care enough to turn "environmentally friendly" because they don't feel they are the culprits of rising populations. Therefore a world disaster, epidemic, or crisis will eventually occur naturally that will shock everyone and adjust the human population to a reasonable number.
Andrea Siluk (Block 2)
The world population has experienced continuous growth since the end of the Black Death around the year 1400. It is currently estimated to be 6,867,200,000 by the United States Census Bureau. The recent rapid increase in human population over the past two centuries has raised concerns that humans are beginning to overpopulate the Earth, and that the planet may not be able to sustain present or larger numbers of inhabitants.
ReplyDeleteThere are obviously some societal problems associated with an overpopulated area, such as inadequate fresh water for drinking water use as well as sewage treatment and effluent discharge, depletion of natural resources, especially fossil fuels, starvation, malnutrition or poor diet with ill health and diet-deficiency diseases. However, rich countries with high population densities do not have famine, poverty coupled with inflation in some regions and a resulting low level of capital formation. Poverty and inflation are aggravated by bad government and bad economic policies, and even a low life expectancy in countries with fastest growing populations, which could include the United States.
The million dollar question, how do we fix or help this? I personally do not think there is one particular way to do this. There would have to be a combination of things going on including new laws and regulation, such as one proposed in China where parents cannot have more than one or two children, otherwise they could be killed or taken away, so the population is regulated better, or there is one more alternative that doesn't involve suffering and dieing, it is to simply stop making babies. Control is the easiest way to fix our problem. Besides that doesn't require much money or effort. Mathematics can show us how many children we could have in order for our numbers to slowly decline to a certain level and then stay on that level. Everything must be done slowly since our society relies on young people to supply money to old people. Scientists say that the perfect number of people would be 1.5 billion, a level at which our planet would have much more to offer to us. No more huge demand for fossil fuels, no more hunger since the planet will be perfectly capable of taking care of that.
Of course, another “Modest Proposal” would be to just eat the babies, :)
Brandon Richards
Block 2
From my research I learned that the current world population growth rate is around 1.14 % . Meaning that somewhere near 2067 , the current population of 6 million will be about double . I don't think that this is problematic to society in the future . The reason being that we simply cannot predict the future . At one point , in the 1960's, the growth rate was a whopping 2 % ! The population at the time was a little more than 3 million . Meaning that in 35 years it was expected to have doubled . 50 years later we are just reaching that goal . Therefore , I don't see how this issue is problematic because it's not a stable number , or constant fact .
ReplyDeleteAs far as solutions go , I don't see the need for any . People always say that our present is just history repeating itself and I completely agree. All the different "solutions" that can be used , have been tried and never turned out right . You can't control people and tell them how many kids to have , because the only way to enforce that would be cruel . Of course you can always use things like drugs but that is not only inhumane but could lead to the use of these things to solve other issues . Personally , I think that there is no way to create solutions being that we don't know what the future holds . When things like tsunamis , hurricanes , droughts , and famines come about , we feel sad for the thousand of people who die as a result . Thus , why do we need to create a solution to stop , or slow , population growth . Natural events , wars , and diseases already kill enough people . Our current world mortality rate is .88% . That's only .16% less than the growth rate . The growth of population represents an act of humanity . I don't think it should be fixed , altered , change , or anything of that sort .
After researching on the topic of world population growth rates I do see that the increase in our world population may be a possible problem in the future. Our world only has a certain amount of resources and if the population continues to expand then more and more of our resources will be used. And one day these resources will run out, which may lead to a sudden population crash [doom doom doom sound affect]. If there was any solutions to this problem then I would suggest that people stop having babies now, take use of birth control. or wait until they are marriage to have sex : ) But seriously I would suggest that they start funding educational programs and ways to inform the population about the risks or problems that it that a higher population growth will lead to...
ReplyDeleteDear Ms.Hurst
ReplyDeletePopulation growth is one of the growing problems of the world.Currently the growth of the world population has decreased since its peak in 1962. This rise was mostly due to advances in medicie; keeping people alive for longer periods of time and preventing young deaths from common disease. The rise in food production also allow the world to support a large and expanding population. Currently the "first world" countries are experiencing minimal and in some cases, negative growth. This is because people live longer and since people are involved in the serive industry more then anything else a family at an early age has become a thing of the past. Any population growth that these countries experience lie in immigration. The USA currently has a population growth of 0.915% compared to the 1.14% population growth of the world population. The vast majority of this population growth lies within developing countries for several reasons. The majority of the economy of these countries lie in agriculture needing extra hands ( much like in Europe before the industrial revolution.) Moreover, there is lack of family planning (a taboo subject) and cultural acceptance of smaller families. Some upcoming nations such as China have at one point imposed a one child only policy in order to keep this population growth under control.
Not to take a Malthusian stand point on the growing population but although the percentages are low that does not mean that the number is. There will come a point where our scarcity of resources will not be able to keep up with such population growth. This is particularly true in African countries where the population growth is staggering. Things such as water wars and other resource fights have emerged, especially in the hard hit places of Sub-Saharan Africa. These wars over resources are ust a taste of what can come. Not only is detrimental to the people involved but it hurts the environment and puts species at risk of losing their natural habitats. There is a common misconception that overpopulation means tons of people. Overpopulation occurs when carrying capacity is maked out. So if we keep growing at this rate we will exhaust our resources which will lead to overpopulation.
My findings on the population issue are problematic. The reason is that governments and people do not see it as a problem. Since most countries have not experienced the plight of what overpopulation can be they fail to react. In the process our ecosystem and resources are exploited.
I think the solution should just be to keep pace with our growth. I mean China tried controlling birth rates and India even offered gun permitts for every visectonmy performed. On the other hand you have countries in Europe offering companies tax breaks for putting saucy commercials at night to get people in the right "mind set" and 6-month paid leave for having a child. This just represents that there is no universal agreement of what kind of population problem there is. The only thing one can do is keep up offer planning and information to make the right decision. After all they are going to be paying for it in the end one way or another.
Sylvia Percovich
Block 4
Hello Ms. Hurst !
ReplyDeleteAs seen through the eyes of many, it's simple to view that world population has vastly increased within the past decades or so. In 2010 the earth holding an estimate of 6.8 billion human beings. The growth rate of the population is vastly escalating, while in the mean time death rates have steadily stabilized at mere 9.5 per 100,000 people. The sheer fact that birth rates are significantly grand compared to the mortality rates, clearly annotates the world's ample rate of increasing population.
One can say that the grand advancements in technology in general has assisted the increments of population inflation. This theory can be accepted due to the fact that less than 600 years ago the world suffered a catastrophe in which the health of people was afflicted, in this case due to the lack of knowledge in such are of medical care. War, also hindered the possible population growth up to the 1940s, in which mortality rates heightened and birth rates steadily aligned. Periods such as the Industrial and Agricultural Revolution, can reasonable be the starting point of these rates in which birth rates surpassed mortality rate, and life expectancy augmented.
With such increments in the population, societal problems are inevitable, human resources will begin to deplete, devastation will soon expand through out the world, and thus population will quickly diminish. Human beings do not realize the factors and possibilities that can occur due to the unnatural balance throughout the world. Beginning with the comprehension of possible catastrophes that could arise, then following up with actions such as limiting births and pregnancy, discovering primitive advancements in technology that could alleviate lack of necessary food sources. All of these ideas, and many more, can be taken into consideration when dealing with future overpopulation.
~Katherine Carrazana
Block 2
Population growth is evident all around us. For example, you can't go two feet without accidentally bumping into a person and getting the "stink eye." Going to the Aventura Mall on a Saturday is a death wish; the threat of being run over seems to escalate everyday. How did South Florida get this way? It could possibly be the steady influx of immigrants, better lifestyle and finances, or it could be the bright shiny lights that attract people like bugs. How can one stop this increase of population in South Florida and throughout the world? I tell you how: prevent pregnancy. (I'm not talking about Abortion here ladies and gents, just old simple techniques.) Well, when I become Emperor of the World (in about three years), I shall visit the cold areas of Scandinavia and Russia, along with all the other cold areas of this planet, and supply those citizens with heaters. Yes! It is simple as that! When it's 50 below outside, your electricity is out, and there isn't anymore firewood, what does one do to keep warm? I tell you what we do, we go at it. This constant trend of "climate-forced relations" effects our society drastically. In fact, Canada's population increased dramatically after their coldest winter ever. There is a saying in Quebec that ties in with winter: "C'est les temps pour faire un bebe"-It's time to make a baby.
ReplyDeleteI do understand that heat also increases sex drive in people, so I believe that every person in hot countries ( such as Brazil, Turkey, Thailand, and let's not forget the Congo!) should have air conditioners and television sets. This way, instead of running home to let off your steam due to the temperature, you can relax on the couch, cot, whatever one sleeps on, and watch some good mind-numbing television. When the program is over, you forget what you wanted to do in the first place; a common practice in The United States.
As you can see, the world shall be stable when I am its ruler, all due to technology and climate control. Simple as that! But what do I really know, I'm just a high schooler, aren't I?
-Evan Jackson
Block Two
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello Ms. Hurst
ReplyDeleteAs stated by the U.S Census Bureau, the three most populated countries in chronological order are China, India, and the U.S.A.. Since about 1950 the worlds population was at a constant 1.5% growth rate then decreasing around 1960 and then increasing from 1960 to 1970. Since then the population growth rate has been decreasing rapidly. The projected growth rate being 0.5% in 2050. Compared to the world the U.S population growth rate has been on a steady rise increasing up to 10.8% in the 1990's. For the rest of the world i do not seeing it becoming a problem. Unfortunately for the U.S if we keep growing at this rate, we as U.S citizens depend on other countries for certain resources and by overpopulating these countries can't over exceed and produce more resources. The U.S would suffer greatly economically and socially. Crowded streets and over-packed social settings.Eventually all these extra people will die due to lack of resources. I do not suggest we force people to have a limit on how many children they can have but instead of having three children, have one biologically and adopt the other two. Adoption is key in stabilizing the growth rate because all the homeless children will have a home and the growth rate will decrease because all homeless people are counted in these statistics. Are they??? - not sure looked it up but could not find if they were or were not.
Karlens Direny
Block 4
Some may think that population growth is a societal problem in the world today considering that that there are 6.8 billion people, and counting in the world. But one must look at population growth at a more specific level per society.
ReplyDeleteEurope has a negative population growth according to the World Bank, they're just not having babies, so what do we do about that? I say we outsource European baby making to China and have the Latino population provide child and elderly care because those Latinos, they just love babies and good old abuelita. :) China is an ideal country for outsource because pretty much every industry turns to the Chinese for the quick, cheap and easy work so they're practically made for a baby makin' boom.
Also, even in America, there is a huge generation gap between the 70 million Baby Boomers (those born in the years 1946-1963) and the next generation. Those Baby Boomers just didn't have enough children to make up for themselves and now we're stuck with a bunch of whiny aging people and not enough nursing homes to shut them up in. In order to combat the generation gap, we must eliminate all abortion clinics, birth control, condoms, and any other sperm and egg deterrents to promote baby making.
There is also the factor that some of these rich white people that can actually afford to have children, but don't make their own, comes into play. I say, if the rich elitists of the world don't wanna have kids, then we shall repo' their sex organs and donate them to the Mexican immigrants who are just experts in the babymakin' process. This can create a whole new sector for industry that encompasses giving birth. Instead of the overly homogeneous Bokanovsky system created in Brave New World, diversity will still thrive. All natural sex will be compensated for the result of a bundle of joy which will yield jobs to millions of unemployed individuals.
Also when the Baby Boomers start croaking, the new babies will be useful to take over their jobs that will steadily become more available to the public. After all, someone's gotta be CEO of Walmart. :) An economic benefit will arise because the costs of houses will become so cheep that everyone can afford to buy a house in that gated community because, with the Baby Boomers that once owned them are now dead. The banks will be glad to give any child bearing family a house for little to nothing just to get it off their hands, because, honestly, who wants to pay 300,000 dollars for a house that smells like old people.
Now my dear readers, you may think this proposition is quite ridiculous, but allow me to pose this scenario...
If couples aren't going to start poppin' out some children, will society turn to robot children to take over for the lost generation? If the world does go in this direction, think of it this way, The Terminator just won.
Thank you,
Vanessa Whitney
Satirical or serious, you be the judge ;D
Dear Judith,
ReplyDeleteEarths population, in recent years, has become quit a concern. There has been an increasing birth rate, specifically in areas were women are typically under educated, and a decreasing death rate, due to the post industrial revolution advances in medicine. With these two factors, the population of earth today has come to about 6.8 billion+.
Some people might ask, "Why is it so bad for the earth population to be about 6.8 billion?" and the answer is, because the earth can not sustain that many people for an extended period of time. The earth can not hold 6.8 billion+ without running into issues of food and water supply, living space, and natural resources. Many environmental theorists predict that at this rate of population expansion the next major world war that will be fought will be based on the issue of depleted water supply. This may or may not be true, but the fact is that the earth can not sustain the current rate of population growth.
Well if there is an issue with population growth, then how do we fix it? there are many ways to ease the rate of birth, but very few ethical ways to increase the rate of death. Therefor the more plausible rout to the ease of population growth would be to ease the birth rate.
Since the birth rate tends to be higher in countries with less educated women, one conclusion that can be made is that lack of education leads to more risk taking when it comes to sexual interaction. One way to remedy this problem is to increase the openness of sexual education. Information on different contraceptives should be given at a young, but appropriate, age and enforced throughout the teen years. Not only this, but contraceptives should be more accessible to teens and less frowned upon.
A more controversial way to prevent population growth may be implementing a law that allows for only one child per family unit, or one that taxes families with more than one child. This policy is very complicated. It would be hard to enforce, and would not be a popular idea, so the plausible way to ease population growth would be the former idea.
---Dakota Edelstein :)
So having done relatively extensive research I have come to the conclusion that there is a definite growth in population. This of course leads to change on a greater scale throughout world in regards to culture and the almost inherent growth in societal change and issues, most would see this as an issue...... I on the other hand don't, in fact I see this as a glorious change in how we as humans utilize resources at hand in this ever-developing and ever-changing world. For example we can see the spread of fatal diseases that will only increase with the growth in population. Many would say we need to waste money developing vaccines designed to kill off the disease, this is foolish. The question becomes why would we funnel money into an obviously failing and unnecessary plan, simply put we shouldn't in fact a better idea would be to increase euthanasia and then utilize the bodies by creating a nutrient rich mulch that will stimulate growth in plants solving three different problems simultaneously. Now on to the issue of over population and inherently an increase in crime, this problem can be solved in a simple and profitable way....... blood sport's. In the time of the glorious Roman empire gladiator's were a way for the government to punish crimes, gain a profit and insure loyalty amongst their subjects, what we can do now days is recreate that system but add a few minor tweaks that will be more effective in controlling population growth, for example instead of one on one fights between men entire prisons can recreate then compete in historic battles of the past. What this will lead to is not only awesome programming but a huge increase in profit through pay per view and stadium admissions as well as a solvent for prison and Earth overpopulation, also just like before mulch 'em and reap the rewards. Of course all of these above ideas are the opinions of this simple (if not some what disturbed) student.
ReplyDeleteOver populated countries are faced with several issues, such as economic burdens and social tension. These burdens will not just be within the ccountry but on a global scale, which will be mainly over food, water, and money because the numbe of people will outnumber the amount of avaialable resources. Two important reasons why the population is excessive is simply because not enough people are dying and not enough people are productive.
ReplyDeletePeople that have nothing to do will be caught up in activities that led to population growth. This, as a result, places a strain on the economy because the government becomes responsible for those that are not able to care for themselves sufficeintly. Studies show that families that hold ful time or part time jobs or attend an institution are those that produce less children, where as individuals that do not tend to have more children. In China, 21 million of its people are poor, earning an average yearly pay of $88. Yet, the poorer people have more children that the elite class.
The solve the problem all govenrments should remove the reproduction organs of individuals that are consider unproductive to their society- the guidelines may be different because each government has different conditions- and an waste on tax dollars. There sshould also be a guideline on the amount of children a family is allowed to have.
Judith,
ReplyDeleteAfter doing some research, it baffles me that the population has undertaken such a surge. Although they reached their height in the 1960s and have leveled off since then, the continually growing population is not something to be taken lightly. A growing population doesn't just mean growing statistics and numbers; it places a serious toll not only on the environment but various aspects of society as well.
With more people comes more space to house, feed and occupy them. The world obviously is not getting any larger, so the population has been forced to cut into precious land, endangering the lives of thousands of plant and animal species. Not to mention the toll this takes on the natural, un-renewable resources which society is struggling to hold onto today.
The only solution which society has is to control the growing population as much as possible. For example, in nations such as China and India incentives are given to families who wait to have children until later in their adult lives or to only have one child at all. Although many would consider this a cruel solution, it is merely a voluntary one. Society would be much more able to make an educated decision on a measure such as this if it was educated as to the effects of a soaring world population. Brave New World makes a satirical effort to depict the effects that population alone has on the makeup of society and warns it's readers. Governments should do the same, making the effort to keep our planet in the perfect balance that it seems to function best at.
Maria Savarese- block 4
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJudith,
ReplyDeleteThe Population rate is is the population of humans on the planet Earth.
Based off of population growth reports, the world is close to reaching the 7 billion mark. After the Black Death in the 1400's the rate increased and peaked at 2.2% in 1963. To this day, Asia accounts for over 60% of the population. Because of many Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions, the life expectancy of children increased greatly, which causes me to wonder about the f u t u r e . As the population continues to rise as the years pass, I wonder if we will have enough resources to support everyone or not. Many third world countries rely on what little they have, and soon that will be us. I suggest that a birth rate be put into effect, and anyone who (willingly) complies with it shall be rewarded with a stipend of funds. People will only be required to have two children within the birth rate law, but only if its their choice. If they comply they are rewarded and if they don't, then they have to pay a tax on all extra children :)
(this message was written of my own thoughts)
<3
Ebonie Wells II Block
The world is overpopulated right now. With about 6.8 billion people in the world right now. Over 300,000 million people in the United States in too much also. Poor China and India with over 1 billion people in their countries. World wide the population increase 1.5% every year. This isn't a problem though. The worst that can happen is an increase in global warming, less resources and hey maybe that availability of fresh water. Which may lead to the extinction of the human race. But what do i care ill probably die of age before the world can get to this point. The best solution is to leave America(its going to broke anyway) and go to England. Ha! we should all follow China's example and just stop allowing families to have over a certain amount of children per household. If someone has an issue with it throw them in prison, along with their family. Ha! If this doesn't work have people pull random number out of a hat and if the got an odd number they should be shipped to Uranus. Ha! There is enough people in the world to build enough ships. This will definitely lower the world population.
ReplyDeleteJames Godet
Block.2
-Satirical/Sarcastic
Hi Ms. Hurst
ReplyDeleteThe world's population is increasing more and more as I type, but the world itself isn't getting any larger. According to The Population Institute, the worlds population grows approximately 80 people per minute. If we are growing at such a rapid rate, do we really have space for everyone? I don't think so, and I believe that the world will soon be overpopulated, although some may feel it is already. I believe that if babies are being born and there is no place for them to live and no way for them to be supported then why are they being born. I'm not saying that people should not have kids because by all means if you have the money have as many kids as you little heart desires but there has got to be a better solution to this problem. If we were able to stop the reproductive organs in every child that is now being born than maybe that would decrease or help level out the population. This should be done for a couple of years until the world can be balanced and then they can begin having children again.
Tatjana Lightbourn (2nd Block)
-These are my opinions, and mine only
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMS. Hurst
ReplyDeleteFrom my research I learned that the world’s current growth rate is 1.14% and it is getting high as the years go by. In the 1960s the world’s growth rate peaked at 2%. In the year 1999 the world passed its 6 billion mark within population. Also within the 20th century the world saw it’s biggest increase within the human population due to the mortalities rates in many countries and the medical advancements and the increase with in the agricultural productivity. This also happened because of the Green Revolution which was a series of research, development, and technology transfer initiatives, and they happened within the years of 1943 and the late 1970’s. In the year 2009 there were 6,790,062,216 individuals that were in the world. How is it that we are growing so rapidly?? Human intelligence is becoming more profound and we are discovering cures to different illnesses which allow people to stay alive for a longer period of time and avoiding children death due to childhood illness. Therefore allowing more people to stay alive.
Is the amount of people within society going to cause future complications??? Yes, there will be a lot of complications within the future because the population will get to the point where not everyone will be able to eat or get any food because the population is so big there isn’t enough food. Also supplies for life like trees, water, and food, and natural resources such as gas will be extremely scares. Also the pollution levels will rise due to the fact that many more people will be using hairspray and many other things to pollute the world. The world will be over populated for its own good, and the amount of people will cause major issues within different societies for the matter of whether who can get food or not, which will cause problems within social classes and within the political realm.
The solution that I can up within is that people that don’t want to have kids should take birth control and that people that do want kids don’t be like those older day people have 12 children, 3 to 4 should be the max per house no more than that.
Sue-Ann Shaw
Block # 4
Hi Ms. Hurst,
ReplyDeleteAfter doing some research on world population, I have learned that overpopulation could become a big problem in the future. If nothing is done to try to prevent overpopulation, we will not have enough resources to sustain everyone. I learned that China has the largest population followed by India and the United States (with over 300 million people).
This excess population is due to several factors other than just more people being born and less people dying. This includes the industrial revolution which was between 18th and 19th century. During this time, the standard of living was brought up because of the changes in manufacturing, transport, technology, and the growth in the average income. As a result, the average American’s lifespan increased and infant mortality rates decreased. Once the population numbers exceed the carrying capacity of the Earth, we will experience problems with not having enough space and natural resources, such as fresh water.
Paul Ehrlich is an American biologist who wrote the book The Population Bomb, which is about mass starvation of humans due to overpopulation. Even though this was predicted to happen in the 1970s and 80s, I still believe in his prediction on overpopulation, unless certain methods are taken to stop it. In order to prevent the exponential growth of society, I would suggest the education of abstinence and safe sex to slow down birth rates. I would also suggest educating people in the different theories and effects of overpopulation, so that people are not ignorant to the reality of what could happen if the population would just continue to grow with no end in sight. My final suggestion would be to find ways to live without resources such as oil, because once they are gone, their gone.
Danielle Malcolm
Block 4
Hello Judith! :)
ReplyDeleteBased on my research, I have found that the world population is currently at an all time high of 6.8 billion, and in the next 50 years is expected to skyrocket to over 9 billion people. With an almost 1.2% annual growth rate, the world has over expended their resources and has become unable to sustain the copious amount of people that inhabit the world. I do believe that this is a true societal problem in the future, and we need to find the most logical solution to fix it. This is a problem, because at our population now, we only have some fossil fuels for 50 more years. If the growth rate becomes any larger, the fossil fuels will be used up faster, eliminating precious time that could be used to find alternative resources.
While I believe that there can be regulations on population growth, it is very hard to make sure every single person in the world of our 6.8 billion people will follow them. I believe that as a necessity to the natural progression of society, we need to allow diseases (such as AIDS) take their natural course, and let it kill off those too weak to handle it. Charles Darwin proposed his theory of natural selection with the survival of the fittest. This theory will apply, with the people most fit for the environmental conditions of the world and the social conditions of society surviving, and those too weak dying, causing a lower overall population. If we stop fighting those diseases, then the natural way of life will take over. All people ever wish for is more time. If we stop trying to extend life, we are letting what is inevitable come as naturally as our ancestors let it many years ago. This solution will exhibit the most fit people for survival, and further evolution, as well as decrease the overall population of the world.
-Holly Denton
Block 2
Hello there Judith Hurst!
ReplyDeleteMy research on the astounding growth of the human population has led to some horrifying conclusions. Apparently in the next 50 years, the world population will reach over 8 billion people. With the ever expanding population and the ever diminishing amount of natural resources there simply will not be enough to go around for lack of a higher diction. Some theorists are suggesting that the amount of life on earth will level off, but several others with far more valid findings are seeing the projection to continue at an exponential rate. Aside from being cramped in our cities, the results of such a spike in world population ranges from the violently swift spread of mass epidemic to the total annihilation of complete races due to starvation. For years scientists have been attempting to find a logical way to mold policy with science to create a solution for what will become the apocalypse. I believe I have come up with an entire solution to assuage (VOCAB WORDS!! YAY!!) the pressure. To sterilize the entirety of the developing world would be far more convenient and less messy than nuclear war. By sterilizing the majority of Africa, a good portion of South America, as well some of the Middle East, we can simultaneously reduce disease while creating a wider playing ground for those countries that actually have their act together. Thus, the Nigerians starving with AIDS can attempt to procreate all they like and nothing will come of it. Eventually they die out, and the planet has an entire continent to play with! We could use South America for agricultural purposes and turn Africa into an industrial production state for the use of the developed nations.
Clearly this is a satirical piece written with no real intent other than to "shock and awe" those reading it, mainly a one Judith Hurst. So I hope you were slightly shocked and awed -- because that was the goal... Always is. Well! I'm finished rambling now, thanks ever so much for your time.
Much love,
Tatiana Becker
During my research of population growth rate (PGR), I found that this term ordinarily refers to the change in population over a unit time period, often expressed as a percentage of the number of individuals in the population at the beginning of that period. The formula that was written for this was the population at the end of the period minus the population at the beginning of the period divided by the population at the beginning of the period. I also found that when dealing with population growth you’ll find two percentages associated with it, natural growth and overall growth. Natural growth represents the births and deaths in a country’s population and does not take into account migration. The overall growth rate takes migration into account. For example, Canada’s natural growth rate is o.3% while its overall growth rate is 0.9%, due to Canada’s open immigration policies. In the US, the national growth is 0.6% and overall growth is 0.9%.
ReplyDeleteBased on my research I do not foresee a possible societal problem in the future and therefore do not have any solutions all because I believe that the future cannot be predicted at the present due to the fact that there are too many maybe’s and could be’s. For example, it is predicted that in 77.7 years, which means in the year 2083, the current rate of growth will remain constant and Canada’s growth population will be doubled from its current 33 million to 66 million. However, the U.S. Census Bureau’s International Data Base Summary Demographic Data for Canada expects for the overall growth to decline to 0.6% by 2025. With a growth rate of 0.6% in 2025, Canada’s population would take 117 years to double. This shows you that the future can branch off into any direction and we can only determine that based on the decisions that are being made in the present. In my opinion, the right decisions are being made and we are on the right track.
Vashti Powell
Block 4
Hi Judith!
ReplyDeleteThe UN estimates that by the year 2050, there will be over 9 billion people. Thats a whole bunch of people, and too little Earth. Several measures can be taken to prevent the increase in population. Laws can be enforced placing a certain amount of kids that can be born and sexual education can be made mandatory. With our resources slowly depleting, several of these measures have been taken, yet it may not be enough. We could save the time and money; after all who would want to travel to a rural country to teach people how to use condoms, and take a different approach. I'm saying that we take a cue from Brave New World and use the hypnopaedic process, but rather then filling the mind with repetitions of what social level you belong in, we should play constant reruns of Jersey Shore. Thats right, Jersey Shore. What parent wants to say that their son is a total tool who calls himself, “The Situation?” It'll be a wake up call and make people realize that our future will be severely damaged. And no, not lack of oil damage, I'm talking lack of bronzer and protein powder damage.
These are just my opinions.
Cinthya Castro
Block 2
Hi Mrs. Hurst
ReplyDeleteCurrently the world's population is an estimated 6.9 billion people. With this current amount of people and the estimated population growth in the next 10 years, this new number will deplete the world's resources faster. I learned from environmental science that we all have an ecological footprint, which is the amount of earths you would use up in a life time if you did not renew the resources. Personally I would need 5 earths to accommodate my life needs. If everyone took one of these online tests, it shows you ways to reduce the amount of resources we use up. Developing nations have a more rapid population growth and less resources but give of about the same pollution that developed nations. If these developing nations began to industrialize and stabilize a better economy, they would add more of a burden to the populations future on earth.
Everyone in the world worships the religion oil, if we do not take action to stop overusing and place stricter regulations on the use of oil and the ways of obtaining it, we will have it for many more years to come.
Hi Judith,
ReplyDeleteThe current world population is well over six billion people; scarcity of resources is causing an increasing fear of the growing population. Prior to the Common Era population was a mere 100 million or so, compared to the present—a planet inhabiting billions. I believe that it is safe to assume that generations beginning to grow apart from religion and the belief of abstinence before marriage, has cause promiscuous people thus increasing world population. Also the fact the average man and woman is able to live a longer life does pose a problem.
The common theory assumed to prevent this growth seems to be education. It is assumed that if we educate people about condoms, birth control, and pregnancy the less likely they are to reproduce. However, one question: How’s that working out? Sexual education is available to all, the average person in America knows how to prevent pregnancy and where to find more information if it were necessary. Nevertheless, one is still able to walk into a high school and find pregnant students. For decades sexual education has been offered to people and every decade the world population increases by another million.
Before I go on, I must remind the audience that my views are purely theoretical. Just like sexual education is not as effective as the world would like, my views may fall into that same category. On the other hand picture this, I rule the world. My wish is your command and I command you to only have two children per household. That reminds the audience of China, doesn’t it? But the idea is quickly found repulsive because it originated from a communist state—which is very bad. The audience being completely oblivious to the fact that after the two child policy China’s population greatly decreased. Of course one might argue that there were forced abortion and infanticides, nevertheless in our society whether a girl or a boy is born, they are all treated equally so infanticides might not be much of a problem. As for abortion, I’m sorry to say that what must be done has to be done. The policy that my rule will be imposing will be temporary; enough to get the world back to a safe amount of inhabitants. Sexual education will be part of the policy for better outcome and will continue long after the policy has done its part. Without a fast way to stop this growth, the world may reach a point of chaos.
Please understand that these are not my true point of views concerning the matter. My point of views are all sugar and roses and believing sexual education is the only way. I was attempting to write as my opposite point of view to see if it was as strong…alright, I’m done now!
Thank you for reading!!
Georgette Taluy, 4th Block =D
It is obvious that the world’s population is steadily increasing. It is not, however, obvious that the actual growth rate is decreasing. It’s difficult to fathom the growth rate decreasing when almost 7 billion people populate the world, it should be steadily increasing with the increase of population. This was the case up until approximately 1960. A graph created by the U.S. Census Bureau illustrates a sharp increase following the year 1960, and since then has consistently declined and is portrayed to continually decline in the future. Therefore, the population will still continue to increase, just not as rapidly as the previous years. With that being said, as the world’s population grows, the amount of habitable space decreases along with the amount of available resources, posing a very big problem in the near future. These two issues are part of the reason why the rate is decreasing - we are running out of room (an extremely problematic situation).
ReplyDeleteThe question which needs to be answered sooner rather than later is what can be done to control the practically uncontrollable population? An obvious and rather redundant solution is to strongly encourage the use of contraceptives and protection. This, however, does not seem practical for the countries who can’t even afford to feed their family or build a shelter. Middle Africa, for example, has the highest fertility rates in the world, averaging 6+ children per mother in a 5 year span. This situation has yet to be slightly controlled. China has made an attempt to control birth rates by limiting the number of children a woman is allowed to give birth to. If the world were to be run by Jonathan Swift, the writer of “A Modest Proposal”, then we would simply eat our children when they become a “burden” to us. Swift’s idea seems to be the only fair solution to the problem. By eating babies we will not only have more available food sources, but also less people to congest the cities.
p.s. ~ Of course I don’t really believe we should eat babies! That’s just a radical make-belief solution ;)
Amy Marshall
Block 2
The Earth's population has increased exponentially over the last 200 years. With our current population of 6.9 billion estimated to expand to 9 billion people within the next 40 years, the world is becoming rapidly overpopulated. The population growth rate of the world peaked in the 1960's at about 2% and has since streadily decreased to our current rate of about 1%. It is apparent that the human population is approaching its carrying capacity, at which point the Earth's resources will no longer be able to sustain any future population growth. This will soon become a problem, as it will be difficult to provide adequate food and shelter for all of the Earth's new inhabitants.
ReplyDeleteThere are multiple solutions we may use to stem population growth. We can impose limits on the amount of children families are allowed to have or ration specific amounts of food to different people. Another option is to lower the amount of aid given to the needy and third-world countries. This will result in a lack of food, causing their population to slowly die out until it stabilizes. Ending funding to medical research will also lower population growth. If all else fails, we can simply start another war to decrease our population.
Perhaps people are looking in the wrong direction to find a solution to our popuation problem. We don't need to kill people, we simply need to find a place to store all of this excess life! I suggest that we establish new societies underwater, floating in the air, and on other planets.
This is satire.
Eric Marshall, Block 2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Judith,
ReplyDeletePopulation is not increasing in a linear manner; instead, it is rising in an exponential one. In 1927, there were two billion people. Thirty-three years later (1960), the population reached three billion. Then, fifteen years later (1975) the population rose by another billion. By 1999, the population had risen by two billion in a period of only fourteen years. The population is increasing at a staggering rate. The world only has so many resources available to the public, and at the rate the population is increasing, they are sure to be diminished. Eventually, the demand of resources by the public will exceed the supply. There is also a limited amount of space available. If the population exceeds the space available, the world will lead to its own self-destruction. This lack of resources due to the ever-growing population is sure to cause a societal problem in the future.
There are multiple solutions to solve this problem before it becomes serious. The writer of “A Modest Proposal”, Jonathan Swift suggests that we should just eat our children when they become too much of a “burden” on us. In my opinion, we should not only endorse Swift’s proposal, but add to it as well. We can genetically engineer a fatal virus that is transmitted sexually. If people choose not to use contraceptives or protection, they are sure to become infected. Thus the unintelligent human beings will be “weeded out” of the population. We could also suggest a standardized test that determines weather or not you are capable of being a beneficial member of society. All of those deemed unbeneficial will be killed off. This will not only decrease the population in an instant, but also cause an increase in economic activity and smarter decisions on reproduction. Thus, with this method, the population will never reach dangerously high levels again. We could just as well put a limit on the amount of children a couple is allowed to conceive. Another solution to the population crisis is to do away with all modern medicine. This, in theory, will cause natural selection and survival of the fittest to come back into play. No longer will people that have bad genetics live a full life to reproduce and pass the bad genes on. Instead, the world’s population will not only decline, but stop rising as drastically. In short, those with good genes will prosper, and individuals with bad genes will die, just as it should be.
*This is pure satire and is not meant to be taken out of context.
-Cody Creagan, Block 2
Hello Ms. Hurst,
ReplyDeleteAccording to Nationmaster.com, the world's current population is almost 7 billion people. This vast increase in population is caused by a decreasing death rate and an increasing birth rate. For example, in the United States, the death rate is about 8.27 per 1000 people. The birth rate however, is 14.18 per 1000 people, almost double the amount of people that die are born in the United States! The reasons for the declining death rates is primarily due to greater access to medical care, improved sanitation, and increasing widespread immunization. Such an increase in population however is rising social concerns because soon, if the population continues to increase in such a rate, natural resources will not have time to reform and the world will not be able to sustain the vast amount of people.
If that is the case, then the solution must be that the birth rate should decrease to become lower than the death rate. If there are more people dying in the world than they are being born, than the population would decrease and become easier to maintain. A simple way would be to put a restraint on the child birth, such as the one child policy in China. The birth rate would decrease but the death rate would stay about the same, causing a decrease in world population.
Another way which would make a greater impact in less time would be to reach out to the medical industry. If today's medicine could cure a person of a disease that would normally kill them, then they could just as easily do the opposite. By creating a worldwide disease that can wipe out the weak in the world, the population would decrease and leave only the strongest of each gender, and of every race and ethnicity. Scientists can create a disease in order to euthanize the people who are the most weak, therefore leaving room for the stronger, a somewhat survival of the fittest, through the use of medicine.
This post is merely meant as pure satire.
Francheska Periche
Block 2
Ms. Hurst
ReplyDeleteWith the advent of news via internet, radio, and television, it isn't very hard to grasp the shear numbers of humans that populate our Earth. Despite claims that overpopulation will be a "bad thing", many fail to see the positives that an unsustainable population can bring!
Studies show that many of the world's poorest countries make up it's highest birthrates. Why not use this to our advantage? With a large number of excess persons within a nation, woulden't it be a lot easier to simply engineer a conflict in which we pit two savage sides against each other? One can only imagine the great entertainment value the civilized world would get watching two barbaric sides fight each other to the death! Not only would this be an intense struggle (in which bets can be made on who will win) it will also provide some action in a now seemingly boring world, while also eradicating the the problem some see with overpopulation.
Another solution I predict, is the establishment of a Lunar and Martian colony by the world's undesirables. Why would we, the aesthetic and sophisticated humans give up the safety and beauty of Earth for some ugly rock? Logically, it would only make sense if these ugly brutes of our over populated world venture out into the unknown to discover a new world. If this were to be undertaken a win-win situation would likely result! Not only would Earth be rid of these undesirable scoundrels, (and have a much smaller population) but those left on Earth would not be exposed to the dangers of a new planet, while the savages struggle to make a new life. Furthermore, after generations of Lunar/Martian life the undesirables will inevitably lose their humanoid characteristics posing serious comedic potential for us Earthlings.
As stated previously, this is a mutually beneficial move in which all sides are accounted for.
Alex Upp
Block 4
Hi Ms. Hurst!
ReplyDeleteAlthough population growth rates are decreasing on the global scale, the ubiquitous threat of overpopulation remains. With inadequate resources to accommodate the needs of many and the rising rates in all things dysfunctional (i.e. unemployment, crime, chaos, and conflict), exceeding the world's population carrying capacity would undoubtedly lead to a social plight.
For the sake of this discussion, population growth rates have been divided into three basic categories: developing countries (LEDCs), developed countries (MEDCs), and the world. LEDCs reportedly have higher population growth rates than those of MEDCs. For example, the growth of Niger's population has been steadily increasing since 1960, while Italy's population growth rate has been decreasing since the mid 1960s (both of which were, and are, subject to relatively brief fluctuations). The high rates of developing nations and the low rates of developed nations cause the world's population growth rate to fall someplace in between.
The risk of overpopulation can therefore be reduced by employing various modes of population control in developing countries. The answer is not to admonish those in LEDCs against licentious behavior that leads to multiple births, nor is it to provide an overabundance of contraceptives. (I choose to eschew the idea of using birth control to solve population problems as it is devastating to the environment. Most of The Pill is not absorbed by the body, so the excess is voided and seeps into waterways. The hormones in birth control pills cause the feminization of male aquatic species and hinder their reproduction abilities. Oh dear, this seems to be a rather tangential point, mea culpa!) The solutions to excess population growth in developing countries include education and family planning that are supported by pecuniary aid. This aid would help to provide condoms and needed medicine. Medicine would decrease the infant mortality rate and lessen the need to have more children to counteract possible losses. Perhaps monetary incentives could also be presented to enjoin voluntary sterilization.
But of course, there are always the alternatives. We cold follow the solutions exemplified in the futuristic society of Brave New World, which occurs after the "Nine Years' War in A.F. 141 (47)." Promoting "bokanovskification (6)," we could alter the test tube embryos to create freemartins, which would sterilize the right portion of the population and promote population stabilization. And even though I do not support contraceptive use, some people may choose to acquire a "silver-mounted green morocco-surrogate cartridge belt... with the regulation supply of contraceptives (50)." Just a thought, or shall I say, musing. :)
Have a great day!
Jeannie Matthews
Hi Ms. Hurst!
ReplyDeleteAlthough population growth rates are decreasing on the global scale, the ubiquitous threat of overpopulation remains. With inadequate resources to accommodate the needs of many and the rising rates in all things dysfunctional (i.e. unemployment, crime, chaos, and conflict), exceeding the world's population carrying capacity would undoubtedly lead to a social plight.
For the sake of this discussion, population growth rates have been divided into three basic categories: developing countries (LEDCs), developed countries (MEDCs), and the world. LEDCs reportedly have higher population growth rates than those of MEDCs. For example, the growth of Niger's population has been steadily increasing since 1960, while Italy's population growth rate has been decreasing since the mid 1960s (both of which were, and are, subject to relatively brief fluctuations). The high rates of developing nations and the low rates of developed nations cause the world's population growth rate to fall someplace in between.
The risk of overpopulation can therefore be reduced by employing various modes of population control in developing countries. The answer is not to admonish those in LEDCs against licentious behavior that leads to multiple births, nor is it to provide an overabundance of contraceptives. (I choose to eschew the idea of using birth control to solve population problems as it is devastating to the environment. Most of The Pill is not absorbed by the body, so the excess is voided and seeps into waterways. The hormones in birth control pills cause the feminization of male aquatic species and hinder their reproduction abilities. Oh dear, this seems to be a rather tangential point, mea culpa!) The solutions to excess population growth in developing countries include education and family planning that are supported by pecuniary aid. This aid would help to provide condoms and needed medicine. Medicine would decrease the infant mortality rate and lessen the need to have more children to counteract possible losses. Perhaps monetary incentives could also be presented to enjoin voluntary sterilization.
But of course, there are always the alternatives. We cold follow the solutions exemplified in the futuristic society of Brave New World, which occurs after the "Nine Years' War in A.F. 141 (47)." Promoting "bokanovskification (6)," we could alter the test tube embryos to create freemartins, which would sterilize the right portion of the population and promote population stabilization. And even though I do not support contraceptive use, some people may choose to acquire a "silver-mounted green morocco-surrogate cartridge belt... with the regulation supply of contraceptives (50)." Just a thought, or shall I say, musing. :)
Have a great day!
Jeannie Matthews
Population growth is not a new issue. Thomas Malthus wrote six essays between 1798 and 1826 on population growth, and how it will drastically effect the world and i agree. With the growing population rate our world wont be able to satisfy the needs of all the people, thus we will fall into a horrible state of disrepair. Famine and disease are going to plague the world as long as our population increases. Thankfully there is an easy solution to this dire issue, "Rosemary's Baby". This is when the fetus is genetically engineered to be born as the surrogate's or mother's worst enemy. Due to this the parent is fully obligated to raise the child, and they will have to suffer with the child who is their worst nightmare, thus they have to make the decision if having a child is really worth all the trauma.
ReplyDeleteAs quality of life grows - careers, material possesions, quality of healthcare, happiness - so does life exectancy. The longer people live the longer they are part of the population. Every child they produce also in turn, lives that much longer. At this current point in time, life expectancy is at its all time high of 78.4 years, for many it will be more. This isn't a new realization, Jonathan Swift wrote about this in an essay he wrote called "A Modest Proposal". So far in the world, no one has discovered any kind of reasonable solution. A solution I propose would be that when you have a child, it would be a hassle to own one. To acquire a child, you would have to go through a process similar to adoption except there would be a home search and extensive background search. There would also be no way to choose what or who you get you child from. The term "baby" is very vague. You could recieve a baby dog, pig, or child.. if you're lucky. Once you recieve your "baby" the process of educating it begins. To educate your child is your sole job once you recieve it. You must quit your job and devote your life to the child.
ReplyDeleteHey Miss. J,
ReplyDeletePopulation growth has done more than just double during the last 35 years (NY Times post) from 1060 until 2010; and that’s just the beginning of a over populated and jammed packed world. To solve the depressing solution to control birth rites, I would first target the top 5 countries, whom are China, India, America, Indonesia, and Brazil. Immediately I would make the government enforce contraceptives to every man and woman. Majority of these countries do try to enforce this method but I feel that the men have as much of a part to play as the women do. After 3 children, max, I would have the Department of Health enforce a monthly sterilization of men, this preventing them from being able to have anymore. As for the women, birth control would be monitored with direction of puberty. This would cut down the amount of children being born and just allowed to live off of the country, regardless of their family being dependent of the government or not. The idea of having the countries infrastructure, food supply, and totally wellness counts on it.
Jonell Joseph
Block: 02
Population growth has always been a problem in our world. With the defects of birth control along with teens not using proper precautions many babies are being born without care and a decient home. In the year of 2010 we face a struggling economy, a war, the never ending migration of immigrants. Thomas malthus explained population growth in correlation with our natural resources and land availibility. It affects the amount of food we are able to buy and sell but most importantly it affects our economy. one way to prevent population growth is better protection, more governmental control over the birth rates and to limit immigration into different countries to prevent overpopulation.
ReplyDeleteThe world's current rate is 1.14% and is expected to double within the next 67 years from its current 6.5billion to 13billion, which is still lower than its peak in the 1960s with a 2% rate and doubling time of 35 years. The same source, About.com, also included the rates of nations whose doubling time is only, for example Afghanistan, 14.5 years. Such findings present a very daunting future in which the world is faced with finding solutions to combat the approaching facts. There are of course many other factors that are in calculated that may lower or even increase the number of people who inhabit this earth, such factors are: advancements in health care and the total fertility rate. It's obvious that the population rate must be lowered to avoid wide spread poverty and crime. I simply suggests cutting the entire world population in half. In America for sure it has been researched that many on welfare are not productive in regards to contributing to the world but yet productive in reproducing more mouths to feed and provide a healthy life for, so why are these people able to contribute to the problem and not in any way contribute to advancement?
ReplyDeleteI suggest several options. One allows the problem to be solved immediately by simply killing half of the world's population based on recent contributions to their surrounding communities. Those in school will be allowed to live once they graduate honorably from high school, but if behavior is unsatisfactory and not productive that student will be killed along with the others in the world who are not contributing before high school graduation. It is a plausible measure and one that should be effective immediately. This method will decrease school drop outs and yield a new society in which the world is continuously advancing. Granted, there are some situations in which an individual is challenged to achieve her or his full potential, so I suggest that a microchip be placed in them that monitors the attempt to progress and if it proves satisfactory based on a number of factors the microchip won't explode in the a lotted two to five years. This method I know will decrease population growth and at the same time increase the work ethic and drive in every inhabitant in the world.
If not there is always the alternative separating men and women by placing them on distant continents. To insure the human race doesn't become extinct a conjugal visit based on the average ovulation of the women will be conducted twice a year allowing only those who have less than two off springs to go on this trip. The babies will then be separated; boys on the men continent and girls on the women's. It creates two different worlds with a smaller number of people and yet continues to produce.
* Suggestions are meant as satire.:+)
- Jalina Pittman Block two
The world's current rate is 1.14% and is expected to double within the next 67 years from its current 6.5billion to 13billion, which is still lower than its peak in the 1960s with a 2% rate and doubling time of 35 years. The same source, About.com, also included the rates of nations whose doubling time is only, for example Afghanistan, 14.5 years. Such findings present a very daunting future in which the world is faced with finding solutions to combat the approaching facts. There are of course many other factors that are in calculated that may lower or even increase the number of people who inhabit this earth, such factors are: advancements in health care and the total fertility rate. It's obvious that the population rate must be lowered to avoid wide spread poverty and crime. I simply suggests cutting the entire world population in half. In America for sure it has been researched that many on welfare are not productive in regards to contributing to the world but yet productive in reproducing more mouths to feed and provide a healthy life for, so why are these people able to contribute to the problem and not in any way contribute to advancement?
ReplyDeleteI suggest several options. One allows the problem to be solved immediately by simply killing half of the world's population based on recent contributions to their surrounding communities. Those in school will be allowed to live once they graduate honorably from high school, but if behavior is unsatisfactory and not productive that student will be killed along with the others in the world who are not contributing before high school graduation. It is a plausible measure and one that should be effective immediately. This method will decrease school drop outs and yield a new society in which the world is continuously advancing. Granted, there are some situations in which an individual is challenged to achieve her or his full potential, so I suggest that a microchip be placed in them that monitors the attempt to progress and if it proves satisfactory based on a number of factors the microchip won't explode in the a lotted two to five years. This method I know will decrease population growth and at the same time increase the work ethic and drive in every inhabitant in the world.
If not there is always the alternative separating men and women by placing them on distant continents. To insure the human race doesn't become extinct a conjugal visit based on the average ovulation of the women will be conducted twice a year allowing only those who have less than two off springs to go on this trip. The babies will then be separated; boys on the men continent and girls on the women's. It creates two different worlds with a smaller number of people and yet continues to produce.
* Suggestions are meant as satire.:+)
- Jalina Pittman Block two
Population growth has become a major concern in the world today. If we continue to grow at the same rate we have been, pretty soon our resources will be depleted, and the human race we be in great peril. There have been many proposed ideas on how to deal with this crisis, but i think the simplest one is simply to introduce a new plague into society. It certainly worked well for Europe during the dark ages, i don't see why we can't just do it again. We could comission scientists to engineer a new strain of Black Death that would work even faster than the infamous one of the middle ages. If my estimates are correct, within six months nearly half of those expensive people will be wiped off the planet, leaving the rest of us to enjoy the world in a much morecomplete capacity. Of course, we wouldn't want this information released to the public at large, for that would create mass hysteria, and nobody wants that. Of course, once we have our new, less crowded, wealthier planet, we'll need a way to eradicate the disease before it gets the rest of us...Oh well! I guess we'll cross that bridge when we come to it!
ReplyDeleteRev. Mack Kennedy.
The rate in which our population is growing has reached an all time high, thus posing many environmental and social problems. Resources that were once in abundance in 1st world economic superpowers will become extinct which will be shortly followed by mass riots and a global war which will be over pocession of the last valuable resources. I say let is happen. A global war will cause the death of hundreds of millions if not a couple billion people. This will do the world alot of good by then putting the supply back into supply and demand. While starting a global war over the last of the resouces will have to be caused by an already short supply of resources, this will cause an even greater supply of resource depletion upon the people who have actually survived the global war...perfect. More and more people will die day by day due to the lack of resources and food around the world. This should be a lesson learned by all 1st world economic super powers that dont quite understand conservation of resources and what is being wasteful. If they wish to prevent such a travisty, they should observe countries in Africa who have been living with depleated resources for centuries.
ReplyDeleteThe world is an ever growing quagmire that will eventually run its self out of resources bringing an end to all over population problems by causing global war.
Brian Cavanaugh
I have done some research and I have concluded that warmer climates such as in Asia and South America populate faster than in cooler climates such as in Europe. This can become a social problem due to the rift between lifestyles the two regions conflict upon. Its culture war could ultimatley lead to prejudice and hatred; much as to the relationship with the poor and the rich and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteIn order to stop this, I propose that one of these trends need to stop. Since it is better to have less people in the world, so nature can adequatley provide for all living, the climate must become cooler all around, thus leading to smaller families and increasing the death rate over the birth rate. To do this, we must move the polar ice caps to these tropical regions, to bring in a North wind and ultimatley irritate the clouds enough to turn into blistering rain which blocks out the sun and disengages its spell over the breeding masses.
I also believe that religion should be destroyed; because it gives mindless couples with nothing to do but to fornicate. Pair this with birth control being a sin and children start popping out left and right. Take away the arcane beliefs of a time where we weren't so densely packed and look to new rules where it applies to this world, the one we are living in right now. If anything, all of the bibles can make good firewood for the endless, impending winter.
these are my words and none other's
Isaac Amor block 2
China's population in 2006 was 1,313,973,713, and is expected by late 2010 to be 1.4 billion. When I was last there in 2008, the streets of Hong Kong were so crowded, even in the middle of a work day. In some homes 3 families would live together. In Italy however the numbers are opposite. There population is declining. Women there, are more concerned about getting an education and starting a career, than starting a family and settling down.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of growing population looks to a lot of people like a problem. But its also how much room people take up. In China, people are living crammed together, and even though the population in America is growing, two people are living on 15 acres of land. Do I see this as a problem? Well I do think that its scary that our resources are already scarce and we add a rapidly growing populaion in the mix. So its a factor but along with other factors.
My conspiracy theory background would say that the best way to decrease the poulaion would be to kill the. Some recent theories is the water source in America is contaminated by the government, that that is making America obeise and more suseptable to diseases and illnesses. And of course the theory that the government would go as far as to plan 9/11 and the "terrorist" attack. That they wanted to level those buildings and murder those people, that the whole thing was a set up.
As for me I probably wouldn't go as drastic as killing people to decrease the population, but just change people's mindset of what they want out of life. A lot of women feel as though there not smart enough for anything or that they won't amount to anything, that all they're good for is to settle down and have five children. I think that if you change the mindset of people and women than having children won't be on the fore front of their mind.