Why do normies think we have a human overpopulation? Do they

>>8433886
People like to imagine we are heading off some sort of cliff. Y2K scare, Mayan Doomsday, etc.

I think it's a lot of different emotional reasons. One is a secret desire to want to kill lots of people.

retards the lot of them

>>8433886
Isn't in 2050 the human population suppose to become aged and begin to drop?

>>8433898
I'm pretty sure its supposed to peak, drop back down like a billion, then reach equillibrium

>>8433886
Human populations are using up Earth's natural resources at a rapid rate that will require two planets' worth of supplies in the next 40 years

>>8433902
What a load of shit, one fucking country in Africa can feed the entire continent but blackies are too stupid to do that.

>>8433909
That's probably an ironic post. It sounds like an introduction to a shitty sci-fi book.

>>8433909
[citation needed]

(sean hannity doesn't count)

>>8433912
Rhodesia once fed the entire african continent now look at Zimbabshit cant even feed itself.

On August 8, 2016, we began to use more from nature than our planet can renew in the whole year.

>>8433913
That's because whites are still oppressing blacks in Zimbabwe from 8225.5 km away.

>>8433913
citation
-------------
A quotation of or explicit reference to a source for substantiation, as in a scholarly paper.

>>8433899
I was sure according to UN predictions the peak would happen in 2030, then drop within 2050 then smooth out afterwards.

>>8433914
This sentence looks like a clickbait header. You need to be more specific on which kind of resources.

>>8433916
http://www.un.org/africarenewal/magazine/special-edition-agriculture-2014/zimbabwe%E2%80%99s-farmers-struggle-feed-nation

>>8433919
Clearly we need more immigrants so white and Japanese people keep breeding and the half-blood newborns catch up with the dying boomers.

who the fuck cares? the technological singularity will happen soon

>>8433915
oh you naive little child

https://youtu.be/uWSxzjyMNpU?t=2m30s

>>8433925
>kick out whites
>starve
Really made me think.

>>8433886
Not necessarily related but an interesting note is that the way our economic models are set up. They account for forever increasing populations and consumption. Once the gears stop turning the whole system will collapse. If too many people fear a catastrophe and stop spending money or a huge disaster were to happen the economic downfall would be the hilariously fantastic.

>>8433932
>doesn't mention how much "poor" countries gain from foreign corporations giving jobs in their shitholes
Nice socialist video. Also no white thing is allowed to enter Zimbabwe anymore (except cars and guns) so that's not as relevant.

>>8433925
How does this prove that they can feed all of Africa? Try to concentrate on the issue here.

>>8433936
How is that socialist?
Maybe the solution they suggest is, I didn't even look.
There are plain numbers there that the poor countries lose 2 trillion every year.
That's how they are oppressed from 8225.5 km away.

>>8433941
Zimbabwe doesn't even have foreign corporations working there, or money to pay, or anything at all. They just keep getting humanitarian aid.

File: i am dumb.gif (1024KB, 218x228px) Image search: [Google]

1024KB, 218x228px

>>8433886

too many people are okay if each and every one of them carries their own fucking weight. But we have too many retards everywhere and since democracy is at play we have to abide to the retards.

so the problem is overpopulation + democracy.

>>8433942
You are being myopic, Zimbabwe is one tiny country with a tinpot dictator issue, were talking about a lot bigger phenomenon here.

>>8433946
Sure, but the topic is Zimbabwe, not the rest of the third world. Zimbabwe doesn't pay a single penny to no one except for cake for Mugabe.

>>8433898
That has more to do with birth rates last I checked. Basically the more a country modernizes, the less it fucks. America for instance has a negative birth rate, our population would be going down if it wasn't due to immigration.

>>8433930
Give us a year.

>>8433961
>US birth rates are in the negative.
Are you serious? How negative are we talking?

>More a country modernizes the less it fucks.
This doesn't sound like a problem to be honest if it wasn't for the fact of ageing being a problem, and losing a nice, skilled work force because of it.

>>8433886
Holy trips of FPBP confirm

Also the meme philosophy a.k.a. nihilism is popular shit along with sem-misantropy
It makes me fucking sick everytime, like if you really hate people so much why don't they kill themselves right now?
Just look at the cancer named /r9k/ and /pol/, ask them about doomday and WW3 and they would gladly be happy about this despite they would shit their pants in real life

The people that hate the most are the most hateable

>>8433968
>Are you serious? How negative are we talking?
Every woman needs to produce 2 children to replenish the parents. Throw in accidents and such and it's more like 2.1 right?

Our current birth rate is like 1.9. Other countries are more significant, Estonia is at 1.55 births per woman for instance.

>>8433968
>This doesn't sound like a problem to be honest if it wasn't for the fact of ageing being a problem, and losing a nice, skilled work force because of it.
Sure, but the idea as I understand it is that the world pop will dip at 2050 because the world has overall started fucking less. I'm not really worried about lack of resources since the issue was always more about poor distribution.

>>8433974
Isn't fair to say that the world population will drop even more from 2017-2050 due to advancements in technology, and the possibility sex robots/other forms of entertainment increasing it and keeping people pre-occupied?

>>8433920
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day#References

>>8433950
You are the only one talking about Z

Obsessing about Z is like analyzing all of Asia by talking about NK only.

>>8433977
Pajeet won't be getting that sick porn VR. World population wise the west isn't all that significant, we're on the decline but places like India are still breeding like rabbits.

Besides sex toys like fleshlights still have a pretty big stigma despite the fact it's a cheap and low tech device. I doubt porn vr and sex bots will become widespread any time soon.

>>8433886
Just because we're not close to the maximum carrying capacity of the Earth doesn't mean we should be actively trying to get there.

There are no rewards for reaching the maximum population. We're at a decent number now we should just try to maintain it.

>>8433886
The carrying capacity of the Earth is closer to 2 billion people. This version of human civilization has cheated by cheaply exploiting underground stores of condensed sunlight (coal, oil and natural gas). The population -- within this century is a conservative estimate -- will undergo a drawdown, reverting back to normal levels. It's not a logistic function. It's textbook: an organism expands rapidly due to an over abundance of resources, resources are outstripped (bottleneck effect), subsequent population drawdown (crash). Every prior human civilization, all throughout biology.

>>8433969
The irony here is of mythic fucking levels.
God laughed when he made you because your existance is a fucking joke.

>>8433886
>Have you ever encountered one of these individuals
Every time I try to make the case for curing aging.

>>8433984
>big stigma
Just wait till after the 2020 olympics, every news site will be writing loljapansoweirdXD articles only further normalizing sex toys.
I mean anime is already becoming normal.

Thread theme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B7-NKnxMYY

>>8434825
If ageing is a disease, then idiocy is a plague. Curing the former would only precipitate the latter.

>>8433886
If the population was cut in half, think of the benefits.

>More resources for the remaining people
>Less pollution produced yearly
>Countries such as India and China will no longer be overpopulated

Now if we killed people based on their intelligence and actions, then we would probably advance greatly.

We really would be better off with a fuckton less people though, even just from a purely managerial point of view.

File: 1477241566928.jpg (23KB, 400x281px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 400x281px

>if human population were to drastically reduce, the economic system would collapse and the survivors would have it really hard until it can be stabilized again
>mfw someone actually believes this

Listen here you jackass there are at least a billion people on this forsaken rock that have absolutely no input in the """"world economy"""" right now.

They are so irrelevant that even those in welfare and jail have more input because at least a system is in place to employ people to manage them.

Also there's barely even enough jobs to employ everyone in first world nations let alone third world and literal "who" isolated indigenous peoples.

File: Hillarysmall1.jpg (9KB, 142x180px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 142x180px

>>8435307

That's not how capitalism works.

>>8433888
>overharvesting not a thing
>deforestation not a thing
>global warming not a thing

It's really unimaginable how fucking stupid you people are. You have no concept of energy, the resource base, economics... hell, you probably couldn't add 2 and 2 because you're fingers are buried up your ass in some trap/sissy thread. You may not starve to death, but you will die from malnutrition.

>inb4 muh technology is magic

Its not about overpopulation in general, but overpopulation on poor areas such as SouthAmerica and Africa.
If they cant manage their population now how do they expect to do it when it doubles?

Its just about the implosion it will be. We can only send much aid until they start killing eachother (even more) or fly to developed countries, overpopulatin the natives.

Tickin

• resource consumption exceeds the rate of replenishment
• resources are therefore diminished
• this is not rocket science
fgt pls

>>8433886
Its not about how many humans it is possible to feed and house

Its about depletion of non renewables like minerals, metals, oil, nat gas etc

And pollutipn

Eventually we are gonna be fucked

>>8433969
They don't hate themselves, they hate you.

File: image.jpg (17KB, 250x238px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 250x238px

>>8436173
>minerals

Which recycle. Any use of iron is pretty much reusable after a while of waiting
>>8436202
They're spiteful losers who are salty about the fact that they live sad worthless lives.
Ironically everyone between Nevada and New York could be shot without America or the world giving a fuck.

>>8436244
Fuck you. Arizona and Colorado are baller

File: 1477015653869.png (87KB, 259x377px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 259x377px

>>8436244
>making an exception for California

File: 1472850225185.jpg (134KB, 500x1200px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 500x1200px

>>8436244
Why are you here then, faggot? If you want to fellate the status quo, there are plenty of good places for that.

>>8433886
>Why do normies think we have a human overpopulation?

Ignorance.

>>8433977
>Isn't it fair to say that the world population will drop even more when third worlders invent masturbation?

Are you actually this retarded, or just pretending?

>>8436301
>accredited retard
>triple PhD

What's the ecological fallout when Africa starts trying to seriously industrialize, building suburbs, 7/11's, and eating American tier diets? "Overpopulation" might sound stupid now but that's when the issues start to materializes when everyone tries to reach an American standard of living.

Declining population isn't a serious option as long as capitalism exists, population will continue to increase because no country can economically survive a declining population, real-estate is the prime collateral loans are issued against today by banks and if you're not keeping up aggregate demand by increasing population your banking sector's going to face a crises when prices start falling and your government will fall from the political fall out when your populations savings are destroyed and they are left homeless.

Any demographic predictions claiming a decline in global population in the foreseeable future is just a joke. Demographic predications never pan out. Population will continue to increase until it's either literally ecologically infeasible or there's a radical change in the global political/economic system.

>>8436325

By the time anyone legitimately notices that the world is too populated (this was 30 years ago), it will be impossible to avoid a catastrophic population collapse due to scarcity of renewable products.

>>8436986
BUT MUH TECHKNOWLOGIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>8436325
they will never become industrialized

>>8437202
People would say the same thing about China 50 years ago.
All that potential cheap labour means it'll eventually happen once all the other global sources start drying up.

>>8436325
It would be an absolute disaster

China tier smog everywhere

Dumping etc

>>8433886
>>if human population were to drastically reduce, the economic system would collapse and the survivors would have it really hard until it can be stabilized again


At other times in history when population has collapsed, such as during the plague in Europe, it has been actually very beneficial economically speaking.

I mean. It disrupts the status quo, that's true.

>>8436244
>mainsream bullies people for being losers and social outcasts
>bulls them more when they reject the mainstream

very nice meme. Also comparisons to pollution are a form of hate speech.

>>8437447
>>8436325
Depends I guess
countries in the west externalize much of the costs of their industrialization that comes in the form of pollution etc. through direct foreign investment.

It's possible that the global economic system might change from now till them and there wouldn't be factors that would require companies to avoid the cost of regulation or by strangled by competition.

>Why do normies think we have a human overpopulation?

It's a sensation of overcrowding. It's a psycho-social limit rather than a purely biological one. Humans didn't evolve in giant ant-colonies. We're not cut out for that shit. There is an extremely high correlation between population density/urbanization and things like psychosis and depression.

>>8437578
Will this sensation increase as the years carry on, and the older generation get to live longer (and eventually we obtain a type of life extension/biological immortality)?

What kind of problems can this sensation of overcrowding cause us?

>>8433886
honestly we'd be good if we made use of all the unused land in Africa and did something like put solar panels across the Sahara, but then again we'd probably all get snackbar'd.

We really need to spread things out. Fucking HALF THE WORLD lives.in an urban setting. Transportation improvements maybe?

>>8437619
The problem isn't crowding though it's resources. Moving things around takes a lot of gas and spreading people out just makes that worse.

>>8437619
>>8437624
When the urban setting starts to decay and people don't want to live in it anymore, they'll spread out on their own.

>>8437633
Nope. It's all about where to the jobs are.

>>8437619
Or we can make new cities in unused areas. We have borderline wastelands and some grasslands which arent being used agriculturally or for cities.

>>8437645
That is fine too.

>>8437642
You have a point as well, but as we advance technologically some work doesn't need to be city focused as much anymore.

>>8437148
I know you're being sarcastic, but some people legitimately don't understand that even if we find a way to triple yields, the problem is even worse than before if the population has quadrupled in the amount of time it took to achieve that.

>>8437599
> What kind of problems can this sensation of overcrowding cause us?

Anything you can imagine that might arise from people going on psychotic ramages.

Civil war, domestic terrorism, not to mention just being stressed to the point of depression/psychosis in the first place.

Mega-cities just aren't good habitat for humans.

>>8437619

Overcrowding is a huge problem, right now. Urban settings are psychologically unhealthy. Herding people into mega-cities is abusive, and it's causing societal breakdown. Much bigger problem in the near term than lack of resources.

PLs take survey

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScWPLAI4F05_h01lUcSTo6l4mqbcdmtw6Tb7a9Z3hdyrk_Dyg/viewform

>>8433886
>rampant starvation and poverty
>not a problem
But nah, to start with we need to not be wasteful as fuck. i.e, do away with current capitalism and eliminate consumerism. Then we'll be alright.

>>8437709
If only we could find a way to travel back and prevent the Green Revolution

File: Screenshot_2016-10-26_16-42-47.png (238KB, 1527x810px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1527x810px

>>8433886
Oh god I really hate it when normies say something like "it's good to not have kids because of muh overpopulation", when you can clearly see on any fertility map that literally all the "white" countries are below replacement rate.

>>8433909
Ecological debt

>>8433932

>Economy is a zero sum game.

kys

>>8438430
>reading a history text 7000 years from now
>it's talking about the great decline and eventual collapse of the golden age of humanity
>main cause is all the intellectuals decided to not have babies, while all the low iq people multiplied like rabbits
>over a few centuries, the average intelligence dropped and dropped and dropped... as the intelligent people died without passing it on
>until the dumb people got jealous of the few remaining smart people and rioted, saying they were being controlled, and kill the rest of the smart people
>society can never recover

>>8438443
>implying it isn't
Any day you aren't getting richer, you're always getting relatively poorer. Especially with automated trading running the stock market.

>>8438430
>Oh god I really hate it when normies say something like "it's good to not have kids because of muh overpopulation", when you can clearly see on any fertility map that literally all the "white" countries are below replacement rate.

When are you going to figure out that smart people in first world countries were/are doing the right thing. The point is to keep it below replacement so it declines.

Africa is beyond fucked; but who flew missionaries all over the fucking place telling them to breed, not use condoms, etc?

Who is throwing open the doors to immigration but muh compassionate Christians?

Who do ya think is an end-of-the-world Death Cult that believes God's hand makes little babies and he'll reappear magically soon? We should have slaughtered the church cultists for this message of mass death and misery, well- get comfy and enjoy the show ya dumb fuck. Africa is going to be a fucking hellhole crammed end to end with suffering and starvation.

>>8439633
What the fucking shit are you talking about, you dumb cunt? There are less than 1.2 billion people living in the US, Russia, Europe, UK, Canada and Australia combined, and population is declining in all of these places, meanwhile the total number of humans alive is more than seven billion, and it is expected to peak at around 9-10 billion, so even halving the population in all of these places would barely have any effect, beside of course wrecking the shit out of the economy, by creating a surplus of old fucks who produce nothing, but need shit like healthcare, food and housing. But yeah, you're right on the other things, it's the fault of the fucktarded Christians who tell niggers not to use condoms because >muh religion, and the cucked leftists who then let these violent animals into our countries, because >muh compassion, and of course the idiots who do their gay charities which then drive local companies out of business.

It's about quality of life.

Yes we can sustain a much higher population with our current resources, but life would be shitty once you spread them thin enough.

Keep the population lower and there's more resources per person. There's no known external threat that humanity needs to populate to defeat so there's no reason to keep breeding like rabbits and making our children's lives worse.

File: RedPill_hand.jpg (15KB, 520x390px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 520x390px

>>8433886
> Why do normies think we have a human overpopulation?
Because we do.

>only the few cities that exist in the world is where most population is concentrated at
If by "most" you mean 51.3% (Source: http://newatlas.com/go/7334/).

> food isn't a problem
Read Marc Reisner's Cadillac Desert. We are draining our breadbasket's aquifer at a rate of 50-100 feet per year. At this rate, most of the land that supplies food will be unable to churn out anything for export by 2050. Those brilliant cities you brag about? Enjoy your rat hunting.

> we have the technology to sustain way more than 7 billion people
And all of it is based on the carbon from dead dinosaur remains. See any more dinosaurs roaming around?

In 2007 we had a relatively minor correction in oil prices. The result? A global recession unseen in 80 years. And that's just the start of it.

> I don't even try to argue.
No, it's much easier to take the blue pill and say, "Ditto, Rush!"

>>8440885
FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING RACIST PIECE OF SHIT SHUT THE FUCK UP

>>8434153
This appears to be correct Lou and I think what many base their projections on. OP seems ignorant of energy, factory farming and what it takes to maintain modern civilization.

I mean sure, theoretically you could have 7 billion or more people without fossil fuels but wew, the squalor, poverty and misery would be epic.

>>8440885
Yeah, it's a race to see which critical resource is depleted beyond repair first. The aquifers may compound with say another oil shock - a big war and rationing - where prices depart orbit, market shelves run dry...1 month without food and your toast. 3 days without potable water your toast. And then the diseases break out...interesting times!

>>8438446
Dumb people are the cannon fodder of war and industry. No matter how fast they reproduce, I'm sure some intelligent person somewhere will find a way to put them to use.

>>8433912
citation for groundwater depletion
http://water.usgs.gov/edu/gwdepletion.html

what would be other examples when we take more than regenerates? i dunno
deforestation
oil
coal
uranium
[insert favorite natural resorces here]

>>8433902
the problem isn't scrictly that we're too many humans,
but that considering our resource needs we are too many.

File: world-food-index-vs-brent-oil-price.png (65KB, 754x453px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 754x453px

It's amazing civilization survives today with all you dumb, but equally ignorant, fucks. Fossil fuels are your gods, faggots! Bow down!

File: oil-isis-grrrreat.jpg (5KB, 250x140px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x140px

>>8443076
Allah knows climate change is a hoax.
Bless Your Heart. 50 halalahs have been transferred to your account.

>>8443884
I always get confused as to if people posting about climate change being a hoax are just shitposting, genuinely think it is a hoax, or actually recognize the difference between it and global warming.

Just like fucking flat earthers

>>8433934
Since resources are finite, that just means when the inevitable collapse happens, it will be much worse than if it happened now. Of course if we're long dead by then, it becomes some other veneration's problem to suffer through instead of our own.

>>8444183
>Of course if we're long dead by then, it becomes some other [g]eneration's problem to suffer through instead of our own.
I sometimes wonder when people first started talking like this...

...Seems it was unheard of until fairly recently. That people always felt some sort of responsibility beyond themselves. (I don't mean in regards to overpopulation per say - but in regards to well, everything, really.)

Fairly certain that if every previous generation had taken that attitude, we wouldn't be having this conversation - certainly not on this medium.