Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ames.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!ames!barry From: barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: I'm OK, you're excess population Message-ID: <928@ames.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Apr-85 03:03:44 EST Article-I.D.: ames.928 Posted: Wed Apr 10 03:03:44 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 12-Apr-85 06:19:05 EST References: <1457@dciem.UUCP> <882@ames.UUCP> <517@digi-g.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Mtn. View, CA Lines: 36 From Merlyn Leroy (digi-g!brian): > The problem with overpopulation is NOT that the Earth can/cannot > support 4,5,6,7..billion people, the problem is it CAN'T support 4,8,16,32.. > billion people indefinitly, since the population DOUBLES every N years. > Such growth will outweigh the Earth, the solar system, the galaxy, and > eventually the universe with just a few doublings (the universe, by some > estimates, has approx. 2^256 atoms in it). Currently, the doubling rate is > on the order of 50 years or thereabouts. People (i.e. Reagan) who say it > isn't something to worry about obviously can't multiply :-) I think this misses the point. We know we're not going to double until the universe is solid people; the question is, is there any alternative more pleasant than the traditional Four Horsemen that will keep the population from increasing faster than the available resources? There is evidence that another alternative exists. Statistics suggest that an affluent and educated population have fewer children than illiterate peasants. Children are free labor for the peasant, and insurance for their old age, but tend to be an economic liability for the middle-class city-dweller. But whatever the reason, population increase has been slowing in countries where the people's material lives have been improving. Perhaps if we can develop our resources to the point that the entire world can enjoy a decent standard of living, population increase would slow to a manageable rate. I don't know the context of Reagan's saying that population pressure is nothing to worry about, but if he was speaking only of the US, I'll have to agree with him. Our current level of population does not seem excessive to me, nor does our current rate of increase. The total wealth of this country is adequate to support its entire population in comfort. That it doesn't (quite) do so is due to uneven distribution, not overall shortage. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USENET: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames!barry