Overpopulation

How should overpopulation be dealt with?

Natures natural adjustment mechanism is disease. But that is being interfered with. People are living longer than ever due to advancements in medicine so much so that it isn't sustainable anymore.

But where is overpopulation a severe problem?

over population is only a problem in the third world.  When woman are educated and have rights, they also have fewer children.  Industrialized cultures with legal protections for women against discrimination +ALL+ have shrinking populations because their birthrates are lower than their death rate.

Simple answer, the solution to overpopulation is to bring everyone else into the 21st century like the rest of us.

War.

overpopulation is everywhere a problem
ok, maybe not for the ulra huge countries like the US, russia, canada and kazakhstan but everyone else suffers from it
nonstop reproducing idiots is why european social systems fail
you can't even get out in the nature here because every patch of land has been idustrialized and is off limits
my solution would be cutting the welfare for all the families who get more than one child and let these leeches die off

>>5
My solution would be putting bullets in assholes like you.

>>6
Why? Because he disagrees with your Marxist agenda?

Nature doesn't have an adjustment mechanism, this implies it was engineered which is a philosophical matter and not a scientific one. If god (or allah, buddha, new age bullshit or whatever) exists then I am pretty sure they have created this universe for the express purpose of us being rational and using science to solve problems, or they would have not engineered it in such a manner as to suggest this, so for the sake of argument we should be investigating it's nature rather than it's creator. It appears human population is affected by an enormous array of factors and we have no one single totalizing theory that can explain it all, we can only identify various trends and look into the main causes to reduce the impact of overpopulation and this is what civilisations have been doing to some extent for 1000s of years.

Disease was omnipresent in medieval societies and famine had to occur before disease had an impact like the black death or the justinian plague, so while your initial observation is not wrong it does not explain everything, other factors include the inclination of poor couples to have large families, prohibitions and poor access to contraception aswell as factors that reduce the ability to supply the population such as drought, war or oppressive regimes using starvation to pacify a population. For the most part a malthusian catastrophe is an oversimplification, of course he did not factor in changes in technology but he also did not factor in the gradual decrease in the rate of increase of food and the varying levels of health in a community which results in increased death rates among the very young and very old as the food supply steadily decreases, however like your idea OP I also accept it as a small factor, a baby boom results in a youth bulge (imagine a population/age graph here) that gets hungrier as it gets older which is indeed yet another factor even if it is neutered by new food production technology.

So what is the most major factor? Technology of course, and the resources needed to utilise it aswell I suppose, sooner or later technological advancement will slow down and resources will be depleted making the opposing factors I've mentioned more and more noticeable which means society will have to focus on the allied factors.

>>2
In 50 or so years there will be more pensioners than working people in the UK.

>>9

Just means the workers will have 2 asses to wipe each while making burgers, collecting rubbish and planning a good euthanasia program?

>>9
That's not an overpopulation problem, that's a social program failure.

>>10
Wishful thinking but current law is against euthanasia.

Btw would you call China 3rd world?

OVERPOPULATE MY ANUS

>>11
>implying any kind of social program can succeed

>>14
>implying
Back to the imageboards, please

>>12

That's why it is necessary to plan and implement.

I didn't make any comments on any nation being any kind of grade lol. China, never been there... it might fit somewhere in the gray?

Yes, if we mean to live developed world standards of living, we are overpopulated by some 3-4 billion people. A large number of those are Africans in imploded countries and Indians(/China, but better managed).

Neutron bombs over Africa and the Middle East would sort a lot of our problems right out. Force India to have a 1 child policy, too

>>17
So edgy! ^_^

>>18
Not really. If we are overpopulated by several billion and those billions will inevitably starve to death because this is a dog eat dog world, it might actually be more humane to neutron bomb them.

Not saying it is the best solution, just saying.

>>19

it seems like 80% of people don't understand cruel sympathy. I'm glad 19 does. Death via starvation and war < Neutron bomb. Like lending more money to someone in debt so they are super fucked instead of half fucked is another. Or telling a girl that a guy actually does like her, just doesn't know how to show it (saves her feelings now and makes it worse later, Cruel Sympathy! Libs love it)

Well the bomb would wipe a slate clean, but it still doesn't get to the ROOT of the issue. Birth.  and this can be controlled with birth control -  forced. via food, water, chem trails or crop sprays, or "medication." Its a big job.  If people aren't able to have kids, the population won't grow or atleast slow significantly. 

Other than that, throw in a new engineered disease once every year with a pricey $$vaccine$$ to cure it and you've got it made.

Start with Africa, minor SE asia, and mid east. but keep China and India, they make all our shit. chinese girls are hawwt too

Birth rates - http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_bir_rat-people-birth-rate

The top tier wealthiest people in the world already have this worked out and its already been implemented.

>>21

Agreed. Killing is cruel--but preventing life isn't necessarily. It still isn't perfectly ideal, but creating a way to make it so many are inable to procreate in a way that doesn't interfere with basic freedoms--this may be best.

the more developed a country = lower birth rate

solution to over population? either develop the third world, or ignore it. i could go either way.

>>23
So global capitalism would be a good thing then.

>>24
Global state controlled capitalism, yes.

>>21

You said that a bomb doesn't go to the root of the problem, but blowing up all those with culture and genetics causing massssss over population would make the world only really hold people who had more reasonable birthrates.

>>25
How would you define what should be controlled or regulated by the state and what should remain in private hands?

>>27
I myself wouldn't know how to make those decisions, but state controlled capitalism is how they're going to do accomplish that. It's also known by other names, corporatism and if one wants to be nasty about it, fascism.

No.  Bad, /pol/, bad.  You do not go around arbitrarily killing people.

>>29
^* /newpol/

And don't worry, we're just a bunch of no-nothings and a couple Stormfags.

>>24
yes globalization is a very good thing. the largest pool in which to trade goods and services will achieve the most efficient use of resources in production.

>>31
You sound like one of those talking parrots that keeps saying that globalization is such a good thing without saying much.

>>32
I've yet to see globalization accomplish any one significant, good thing.

>>33
Free trade.

>>34
Where?

>>34
Haha, that's a laugh. Nothing 'free' about it.

>>35
Everywhere except countries that have tariffs, goods from these countries will be taxed equal to the amount they tax from world trade until they realise it's pointless.
>>36
Yes it is, people would be able to trade how they want without interference.

>>37
No, I mean "where" as in "what nations?"  In what nations do their governments play an insignificant or nonexistent role, neither managerial nor representative, in its trade?

I know. Put mercury and formaldehyde in the flu vaccines, genetically modify the majority of foods as well as putting preservatives and other cancer inducing chemicals in them, such as aspartame and sodium nitrite, put fluoride in the water supply as well as allow pesticides & pharmaceuticals to be in the water, and spray chemicals such as barium salts and aluminum oxides all throughout the atmosphere... oh wait all that stuffs already being done. i got nuthin

>>39
lern2 chemistry