View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-28-2008, 08:50 AM
Zylark is offline  
Zylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyondZylark has a reputation above and beyond
Zylark
Old School Stoner
Zylark's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Norway, on the Westside where it rains perpetually.
Posts: 2,951
Simple answer is, we do not know what the population limit is with regards to sustainable development. But we do know that current and projected population growth is not sustainable.

For one thing it threatens the few wildlife areas we do have. And secondly, since most won't be content with living in abject poverty, the demands on energy will skyrocket. And with current technology, that spells ecological disaster.

Where we see most childbirth today, is in developing and underdeveloped countries. Which is a bit ironic, since these parts of the world, are the ones that is least prepared to handle any growth in their population.

China essentially did the only reasonable thing to curb this development, before it began to spin out of their control. But received little else but contempt for it from the rest of the world. They set a very definite limit on how many children (would-be) parents could have, and promoted birth control in a massive way. That last thing, is why China among developing nations got one of the lowest HIV/AIDS numbers btw.

Speaking of HIV/AIDS, sub-saharan Africa today have an epidemic. In some regions, a majority is infected. It won't do much to help their societies develop, but it will put a cap on population growth there.
__________________
Reply With Quote