Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!brahms!desj
From: desj@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: Population Density
Message-ID: <12297@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 05:07:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12297
Posted: Mon Mar 10 05:07:00 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 05:25:14 EST
References: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].844266.860309.KFL>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: desj@brahms.UUCP (David desJardins)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 25

In article <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].844266.860309.KFL> KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
("Keith F. Lynch") writes:
>  If we define the present population density of Hong Kong, 12,000
>people per square mile, as the limit, then the world can support about
>200 times the population you estimate.  We don't run into trouble for
>300 years.  This just shows that we should have many large space
>colonies operating by then if we want population to be able to
>continue to grow at this rate.

   Come on.  Hong Kong may have 12000 people per square mile, but
what percentage of its food does it import?  99% or so?  It seems
that people who don't actually produce their own food take it a bit
too much for granted.

>  I *DO* think it should always remain a matter of personal choice.
>If people do not like to live around highly populated areas, why is
>it that most people tend to clump into heavily populated cities,
>rather than distributing themselves fairly evenly across the world?

   In many parts of the world (e.g. Mexico City) the standard of
living is much higher in the city.  (This means malnutrition instead
of starvation!)  But these people are still depending on the surrounding
underpopulated area to provide their food.

   -- David desJardins