### You are viewing a page indexed by search engine. All comments on the topic are put together without order and may be confusing to read. To see organized discussion click here. ###
Human population growth.
There is food for everyone, it is just transported to everyone. It is more profitable to drop bombs than to drop food in those places. [1]7 billion people, the earth can support more, but with many of the farmlands being taken over by cities for one reason or a nother, their is a problem. Places where food should be produced, are instead replaced with houses. That is where it is a problem. Not that we are overpopulated, just we don't have living quarters versus business and other things organized for maximum population.The way its stated, it be a yes. However I think it implies more towards total population of the world, 7 billion people? 1.7 billion are poor and the number increases everyday. Each day the price of necesities goes up, because production can't keep up with demand. Feeding 7 billion mouths, with only enough to adequetly to feed half of that? I think that is more the point, then the value of life. So does this mean that Australians have more human dignity and decency than Japanese, or Namibians than Spaniards? [2] Democracy cannot survive overpopulation.
Human dignity cannot survive overpopulation.
Convenience and decency cannot survive overpopulation.
As you put more and more people into the world, the value of life not only declines, it disappears. It doesn't matter if someone dies, the more people there are, the less one individual matters. [3] Overpopulation is a self-reparable problem - if it exist, due to lack of food a part of population dies or science and technology figures new ways of producing food, so solution is imposed or found.
What represents a bigger problem is a fixed growth, as it perpetuates the problem of overpopulation. Fixed growth of anything (except maybe information and knowledge) is by itself a problem as it represents an exponential growth and inevitably leads to a non-sustainable situation and in the case of human growth to overpopulation. Given the Earth's limited resources this exponential growth driven overpopulation represents a grave danger which can best be understood by understanding the exponential function itself. Is human population growth a problem?
The exponential function is used to describe the size of anything that is growing steadily, for example, 7% per year.
At a 7% rate increase per year, it will double in size in about 10 years. In another ten years it will double again (or quadruple the initial size).
In other words:
100 will become 107 in 1 year (100 * 1.07 = 107)
107 will become 114.49 in 1 year (107 * 1.07 = 114.49)
...
100 will become 200 in 10 years and 3 months, and 400 in 20 years and 6 months, 1000 in 34 years.
In some places there is overpopulation, in other places there is not. Maybe the solution is in migrations of human populations - people should move where there are resources and enough space. Opinion on whether Earth is overpopulated depends on individual's preferences which are determined greatly by surroundings and not by some inherent need for certain amount of space. If you come from Australia, you are used to having huge space around you. If you come from Japan, you are used to sleeping in a box. Both populations are supported by their habitat. In overpopulated areas population would starve, which doesn't happen in these countries - by definition they are not overpopulated. [4][5] Overpopulation is a condition where an population exceeds the capacity of its habitat to support it, so by definition it is a problem. The question is, is there overpopulation? Is overpopulation a problem? Human population growth.
Is democracy the best form of government?
