Overpopulation: Smart folks vs Dumb folks

C

californiagrown

Active member
Our planet will reach its carrying capacity for humans(or atleast its peak population) sometime in the next 100-200 years. This is widely accepted.

Generally, smarter, wealthier people are having less and less children and dumber, more impoverished people are having more and more children.

Since overpopultion is an inevitability, samrter people should give up the hope that "they are doing their part to ease overpopultaion". instead they should try and even out the intelligence balance of the world by having many kids. Its for the betterment of the human race.

thoughts on this general hypothesis?
 
I think we should just take warning labels off everything and let the problem solve itself
 
nature tends to even out the intelligence balance by itself. Luckily, a major disease is going to spread through the world within the coming months.
 
This. And its because of evolution: All the people who are able to withstand gunshots will survive and breed, and by like 2085 there will only be bulletproof humas left. Not only will be way more badass, but we'll be well prepared for the invasion
 
Wrong. It is widely accepted that AT OUR CURRENT TRENDS the earth will reach carrying capacity in 100-200 years. Also the relationship between the number of kids has to do with the development of a country. More developed countries have fewer children and developed countries that are in economic downturn have even fewer children (russia is running at a negative right now). However, developing countries are still a problem, but as the world develops the number of children will decrease and our trends will change. Honestly, I think overpopulation is the least of our worries.
 
if+you+watch+idiocracy+you+will+fear+the+opposite+may+_f996274a3a6d0724c02ece9cc8656cdf.jpg
 
As developing countries further progress (which they will), the population rate will lower significantly. W3Rd
 
I still think there is a hope it could level off safely, the way they do it in china with only one child isn't that bad if you think of it in comparison with the extinction of humans. But overall, I'm just glad I'll be dead by then.
 
is OP serious? can't tell, just about the most retarded analysis of overpopulation problems I have ever heard
 
by this do you mean people in america having children vs. people in africa having children, or wealthier people in america having children vs. poorer people in america having children?
 
so your joking... more wealthy people having children will not even out the 'intelligence balance.' poor people have more children for a reason... poverty, hunger, war, etc.... its all about reducing these structural and institutional conditions, and thus global inequality, an birth rates in formerly impoverished nations will decline to more sustainable levels.
 
You are obsessed with gun control, almost every post I have seen of yours today was about gun control in some way, even in threads (like this one) that have absolutely no relation to guns what so ever.
 
you know whats more useless than useless posts?

useless posts about useless posts!

You are fired from my thread. put your things in a box and leave now.
 
We also need to consider that overpopulation isn't just about how many people there is, but also about how those people live their lives. We all know that there aren't enough resources for everyone in the world to live a 1st world lifestyle; think about how much energy, water, fuel, and food you burn through every day. Whole families in the 3rd world use up far fewer resources in a week than people here do in a day. It's pretty clear to me that it's us that are currently perpetuating an unsustainable lifestyle model for devepopping countries to follow, and we're going to be the ones responsible when we do hit the population tipping point.
 
Yeah, fuck hospitals, man.

There is really no easy answer, but I believe some event (smallpox, nuclear conflict, etc) will reduce population significantly before we reach the 'carrying capacity.'

 
Africacwont develop by itself. China is developing the east coast of it right now. The technology level in Africa is so far detached from the rest of the the world it will never catch up
 
Solution: Populate the moon.

BOOM!! Problem solved.

Also, Africans may have more babies, but that's because there's a higher mortality rate, too...
 
People really take overpopulation much too seriously IMO. While it is an issue, were not gonna lose like half of the worlds population the day we hit carrying capacity.

What will happen is food will become more scarce, and either people will be forced into making/buying more, or dieing. At this point right now overpopulation will probably only have a major affect on third world countries which are already seeing famines and shit right now.
 
Raise the living standards of the poorest billion people on earth, allowing access to birth control and equal rights to women. That would lower the population
 
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward AbbeyI think overpopulation is one of the biggest problems we face. If you think about many of our current concerns, you will find that a lot are caused partly by overpopulation. But instead of addressing overpopulation, the source of these problems, we address these problems individually, only delaying the inevitable. I can't think of many problems that we have that can be solved by adding 75 million people every year. The earth is finite but we allow our population to increase as if it is not. Personally, I think we should have done something about it decades ago. Then we wouldn't have to have this conversation today. I think it is pretty ridiculous to pretend that it's not a problem.
 
Nah, he knows what he's talking about, we can just make and buy more food! problem solved.

Overpopulation makes me sick, it's so depressing that people still don't realize it's a problem.
 
I don't think your "evening out the intelligence" idea would work at all. Only humane solution i can think of is passing legislature in developed countries and making an effort to provide strict birth control in undeveloped countries. Obviously, passing a law restricting the number of children is basically hopeless, especially in America since it would bring about a massive shit storm. Maybe some type of tax incentive would work just as well. I have no idea if our constitution even allows that sort of thing. I agree that it's not fair but i think it needs to be done and is the responsible thing to do. People need to consider themselves more of citizens of the earth than citizens of a country.
 
Maybe I just had the most genious thought ever. That this is extremely racist.

The idea is to preserve the positive traits of the intelligence in the human gene. However this only functions off the basis that the people in these impoverished areas are actually genetically stupid. Because in general impoverished areas are those of minority or oppressed groups, such as LGBTQ and people of colour, this makes the connection that these people are genetically inferior.

However the truth is that these people aren't educated to the western standard, due to lack of school access and technology. That just means that less educated people are going to reproduce, not that dumber people will reproduce. It's all about sexual education and equality, where those are lacking, more reproduction happens by these 'uneducated' people, so in reality, this idea, this very thread is creating inequality and helping to continue to impoverish those people, leading to the very thing it is frustrated with.

Suck on that someone or other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top