Nine billion of us by 2050

[Cowperson]

Many of the world’s largest industrialized nations will lose population between now and 2050 as low birth rates, struggling economies and curbs on immigration stifle growth, says the author of a world population report.

. . . . while the world’s population will increase nearly 50 percent by mid-century, Japan will lose 20 percent of its population in the next 45 years, while Russia, Germany and Italy will also see declines.

The United States is the biggest exception among developed countries, with its population forecast to rise by 43 percent from 293 million now to 420 million at mid-century.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5732657/

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

solent green is people

[troutman]

Monthly world population figures:

http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/popclockw

Population for the world, 1950 - 2050:

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html

Growth rates declining:

http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/img/worldgr.gif

[Cowperson]

I had posted an article a few weeks ago indicating that conflicts - wars - arise in areas where populations include a heavy preponderence of young men, naturs way of killing a lot of them off to bring things in balance again.

Does the developing global population demographic ensure the world will be a more violent place in the future?

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Aug 17 2004, 03:32 PM
I had posted an article a few weeks ago indicating that conflicts - wars - arise in areas where populations include a heavy preponderence of young men, naturs way of killing a lot of them off to bring things in balance again.

Does the developing global population demographic ensure the world will be a more violent place in the future?

Cowperson

If you believe that human's will behave like Rats do when thier population density increases.

I have no doubt that violence on a mass scale is effected by density, but I also believe that there are more factors then that including things like availability of food, temperature, etc

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch+Aug 17 2004, 12:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaptainCrunch @ Aug 17 2004, 12:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Aug 17 2004, 03:32 PM
I had posted an article a few weeks ago indicating that conflicts - wars - arise in areas where populations include a heavy preponderence of young men, naturs way of killing a lot of them off to bring things in balance again.

Does the developing global population demographic ensure the world will be a more violent place in the future?

Cowperson

If you believe that human's will behave like Rats do when thier population density increases.

I have no doubt that violence on a mass scale is effected by density, but I also believe that there are more factors then that including things like availability of food, temperature, etc [/b][/quote]
I see your argument, and frankly I don't know if I believe it. I don't know if I believe Cowperson's either

1. brain believes Capt Crunch
2. gut believes Cowperson (explain the full moon effect on humans)

[troutman]

The most impotant factor in population rates is the education of women. Wherever women have access to education, growth rates decline or often are negative. This is something the UN is trying to improve around the world.

[calf]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch+Aug 17 2004, 09:35 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaptainCrunch @ Aug 17 2004, 09:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Aug 17 2004, 03:32 PM
I had posted an article a few weeks ago indicating that conflicts - wars - arise in areas where populations include a heavy preponderence of young men, naturs way of killing a lot of them off to bring things in balance again.

Does the developing global population demographic ensure the world will be a more violent place in the future?

Cowperson

If you believe that human's will behave like Rats do when thier population density increases.

I have no doubt that violence on a mass scale is effected by density, but I also believe that there are more factors then that including things like availability of food, temperature, etc [/b][/quote]
I'm not really educated on this type of issue (though I'm taking a course in the fall to learn more), but would education levels and economic proseperity also have an effect?

[Maritime Q-Scout]

yep the education of women is a big factor. When talking about population in grde 12 global geography (why I still remember this I dunno) my teacher gave a very basic example to explain this:

woman goes to school, and graduates high school at 18
then goes to university for 4 years, now 22
then maybe a masters program for 2 years, 24
now she works in her job and gets settled in it, 3-4 years, now 27-28
settles down and gets married after being comfortable in her job, now 30
then wait a bit in the marrige before deciding to have kinds, now 32
then gets pregnant, and devlivers, now 33
has another child possibly 2-3 years later, and suddenly she's 34-35 years old

in a place where there isn't the same level of education or even high school, if you start having children at 17 or 18, then statistics show you'll end up having more children, look at families of your grandparents, or great grandparents with like 7-10 children. Start having children ealier you end up having more.

Another factor was infant mortality rates, if one in say 7 children die before the age of 10, you're going to want to have more children to ensure survival, it's a basic instinct. Whereas in the first world, that isn't much of a worry.

In the developped nations the natural reproduction rate is 2.1 children for every 2 people, whereas in developping nations it's alot higher.

those are just come factors that I remember from a class 5 years ago, so don't treat them like the bible (like everything else I say ), I might be off on somethings.

[Reaper]

Nine billion people...guess I should step up the pace on my killing spree.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally posted by Reaper@Aug 17 2004, 12:53 PM
Nine billion people...guess I should step up the pace on my killing spree.

I'm thinking 9 million, that sucks as well

if 51% of the population is female that mean there are 4.59 billion girls out there

which means I'm gonna have to hear "NO!" 4.59 billion times

[calf]

Originally posted by Maritime Q-Scout+Aug 17 2004, 09:57 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Maritime Q-Scout @ Aug 17 2004, 09:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Reaper@Aug 17 2004, 12:53 PM
Nine billion people...guess I should step up the pace on my killing spree.

I'm thinking 9 million, that sucks as well

if 51% of the population is female that mean there are 4.59 billion girls out there

which means I'm gonna have to hear "NO!" 4.59 billion times [/b][/quote]
Don't sell yourself short. I'm sure it's closer to 4.57 billion

[BlackEleven]

I think birth-control is also a pretty big factor in population growth. Some people object to it for religious regions -- like almost the enitre continent of South America for example. And others just don't have access to it, due to financial means or lack of education regarding the subject -- like the citiizens of most African nations. Its an unfortunate situation.

[troutman]

Originally posted by FlamesFanInMTL@Aug 17 2004, 04:53 PM
I think birth-control is also a pretty big factor in population growth. Some people object to it for religious regions -- like almost the enitre continent of South America for example. And others just don't have access to it, due to financial means or lack of education regarding the subject -- like the citiizens of most African nations. Its an unfortunate situation.

Birth control follows from the education of women.

[BlackEleven]

Originally posted by troutman+Aug 17 2004, 05:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (troutman @ Aug 17 2004, 05:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FlamesFanInMTL@Aug 17 2004, 04:53 PM
I think birth-control is also a pretty big factor in population growth.# Some people object to it for religious regions -- like almost the enitre continent of South America for example.# And others just don't have access to it, due to financial means or lack of education regarding the subject -- like the citiizens of most African nations.# Its an unfortunate situation.

Birth control follows from the education of women. [/b][/quote]
Agreed, but their are other factors involved as well, like money, religion and accessability.

[Flames89]

Originally posted by calf@Aug 17 2004, 11:58 AM

Don't sell yourself short. I'm sure it's closer to 4.57 billion

That is still a lot of sex.

.02 Billion = 2 Million

Assuming you start having sex when you are 17, and assuming each "session" with a different girl takes 10 minutes - then give yourself only 5 minutes to regain strength.

If you kept that routine of 10 minutes "on", 5 minutes "off" for 24 hours a day, 365 days/year, it would take 57 years to achieve that goal and you would be 74 by the time you had sex with 2 million women.

[Cube Inmate]

Originally posted by Flames89+Aug 17 2004, 12:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flames89 @ Aug 17 2004, 12:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-calf@Aug 17 2004, 11:58 AM

Don't sell yourself short. I'm sure it's closer to 4.57 billion

That is still a lot of sex.

.02 Billion = 2 Million

Assuming you start having sex when you are 17, and assuming each "session" with a different girl takes 10 minutes - then give yourself only 5 minutes to regain strength.

If you kept that routine of 10 minutes "on", 5 minutes "off" for 24 hours a day, 365 days/year, it would take 57 years to achieve that goal and you would be 74 by the time you had sex with 2 million women. [/b][/quote]
0.02 Billion = 20 Million...

Our buddy would be closer to 587 years old by the time he finished.

[Cube Inmate]

About 1/32 of Earth's surface (about 15.4 million sq. km) is arable land. With a population of 9B, that's about 1730 sq. metres for each person, or a plot of land 41 m on a side. That's just under 1/6 of a Canadian football field per person.

You think you could sustain yourself on that much land? Just for perspective, try out this ecological footprint quiz ... my "food" footprint came out to about 24,000 sq. metres. No...I'm not a granola-eating greenie...I just felt like doing some calculations to put this population boom in perspective.

Edit: That quiz considers "biologically productive" earth...including oceans, I presume. Still, I wouldn't want to have only 1730 sq metres to support me, my chickens, cows, pigs, corn, wheat, rice, etc. D'oh! Forgot barley!...need barley for beer.