If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   Remember when overpopulation was going to kill us all? Now we're in the age of the "fertility panic"   (hotair.com) divider line 316
    More: Obvious, law of diminishing returns  
•       •       •

11871 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Feb 2013 at 9:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



316 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-18 08:38:29 PM  
More than 6 billion people in the world, we wont run out any time soon.

/governments are more worried about future tax revenue
 
2013-02-18 08:44:39 PM  
Only if you're worried about the ratio of white people to everyone else.
 
2013-02-18 08:46:05 PM  
I blame porn.
 
2013-02-18 08:54:44 PM  
From the Wikipedia article on ZPG (Zero Population Growth)

In the late 1960s ZPG became a big political movement in the U.S. and parts of Europe, with strong links to environmentalism and feminism. Yale University was a stronghold of the ZPG activists who believed "that a constantly increasing population is responsible for many of our problems: pollution, violence, loss of values and of individual privacy."[8] Founding fathers of the movement were Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb, and Thomas Eisner. Ehrlich stated: "The mother of the year should be a sterlized woman with two adopted children."

My father was an OB/GYN in the '60s and 70's. I remember him wearing a ZPG button on his lab coat.
That was the thinking post baby boom, and he was a supporter of that cause. Geez Dad, what a waste of time.
 
2013-02-18 08:56:43 PM  
The biggest side effect of the population leveling off is that once the baby boomers die off, there will be a massive world-wide worker shortage.  Countries will be fighting to let immigrants in.  It will be the greatest boon to the Middle Class since the Black Death.
 
2013-02-18 09:21:17 PM  
well you can blame me for lack of whatever the US average crotch fruit is for married couples. We are 43, I am snipped, and adoption is not on the table.
 
2013-02-18 09:21:31 PM  
I prefer a fertility picnic.
 
2013-02-18 09:23:59 PM  
Paul Ehrlich was so very wrong on so many levels.

I hope that Julian Simon's heirs still have the framed check.
 
2013-02-18 09:24:51 PM  
Definitely white people problems.
 
2013-02-18 09:26:46 PM  

GAT_00: Only if you're worried about the ratio of white people to everyone else.


This.

There was an article in the Wall Street Journal recently that began by saying "hey, the middle class is vanishing because of birth rates!  Let's use 'white and college educated' as a stand-in for middle class, because that's what we think when we think middle class."

fark the WSJ and fark this line of thinking.
 
2013-02-18 09:27:37 PM  
Fertility panic isn't so much related to overpopulation as it is to funding the old people's pensions. If we don't have enough young people we're going to have to go all soylent green on the old folks homes.
 
2013-02-18 09:27:44 PM  

basemetal: More than 6 billion people in the world, we wont run out any time soon.

/governments are more worried about future tax revenue


When I was in elementry school in the 80s two things were taught - we will run out of oil by the year 2000 and over population will destroy this planet  And here we are - happily plugging along.

/lets talk about real problems like climat change and feed people - both are political problems
 
2013-02-18 09:28:22 PM  

GAT_00: Only if you're worried about the ratio of white people to everyone else.


Don't forget the Japanese. Half the incentive for creating robots is so they can avoid having to open their borders to permanent immigration.

Meanwhile, China one child policy mixed with their preference of boys means you'll have a generation of working class men with no females around.

Hmmm.... Maybe Japan and China can finally reach piece by trading Japanese sex bot technology to help the Chinese government from having a revolution of sexually frustrated men.
 
2013-02-18 09:28:39 PM  
Yes, but the reasons are idiotic: They're not moral, or ethical, or survival, or even rational.

They're economic.

And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.

The solution, then, is not the keep increasing the population for economic prosperity's sake, but to throw away Capitalism entirely and adopt a new economic metric that doesn't rely on growth and profit as the be-all and end-all of human endeavor.

We have to change our priorities here.
 
2013-02-18 09:29:29 PM  
hey, if there's any ladies want to jump on this bandwagon I do tend to make cute, smart, crazy children

just sayin'
 
2013-02-18 09:30:50 PM  

ultraholland: I prefer a fertility picnic.


encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

The far out future truly is a great place.

/May no accurately represent the fate of the Earth in regards to overpopulation.
//Here's hoping it does
///Slashies come in threes.
 
2013-02-18 09:31:00 PM  
Because more people are smart enough to realize having kids may not be worth it?  Even if (not "after") they grow up and leave home?

Anyone else who can take the risk ... my hat's off to you.  Mean it.
 
2013-02-18 09:31:38 PM  

Fubini: Fertility panic isn't so much related to overpopulation as it is to funding the old people's pensions. If we don't have enough young people we're going to have to go all soylent green on the old folks homes.


What if the baby boom isn't about preventing Soylent Green, but crafty old people plotting to enact Swift's A Modest Proposal?
 
2013-02-18 09:31:46 PM  
I'm one of six kids and I have a total of seven nieces and nephews. One of the nephews is adopted. So, we're even.
 
2013-02-18 09:32:13 PM  

Ishkur: Yes, but the reasons are idiotic: They're not moral, or ethical, or survival, or even rational.

They're economic.

And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.

The solution, then, is not the keep increasing the population for economic prosperity's sake, but to throw away Capitalism entirely and adopt a new economic metric that doesn't rely on growth and profit as the be-all and end-all of human endeavor.

We have to change our priorities here.


Profit's a fine motivator/metric.  Profit GROWTH is the killer.  When all those assholes in the 80s decided to fetishize financial industry gambling, we all lost.
 
2013-02-18 09:32:17 PM  
Well, fewer humans, particularly in developed countries is certainly better for maintaining the habitability of the earth, but governments depend on an ever-expanding tax-base to make good on those promises they made.
 
2013-02-18 09:32:20 PM  

Ishkur: And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.


Actually the structure of the faulty economics (not capitalism) put in place by most western gov'ts is what needs constant growth.  Capitalism does not.
 
2013-02-18 09:32:45 PM  

basemetal: More than 6 billion people in the world, we wont run out any time soon.

/governments are more worried about future tax revenue


It's possible to run out of people in a typical human life span. If for some reason no new people were made from now then there would be none of us left in 100 years.
 
2013-02-18 09:33:15 PM  
I'm with Gat on this one.  I see white racists complain about being out-bred by the browns all the time and all I can think is, "You can't stand your own women enough to fark them.  It's almost like subconsciously you aren't convinced of your own superiority after all."
 
2013-02-18 09:33:22 PM  

Ishkur: Yes, but the reasons are idiotic: They're not moral, or ethical, or survival, or even rational.

They're economic.

And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.

The solution, then, is not the keep increasing the population for economic prosperity's sake, but to throw away Capitalism entirely and adopt a new economic metric that doesn't rely on growth and profit as the be-all and end-all of human endeavor.

We have to change our priorities here.


But that's like work and stuff. 3D printing and private asteroid mining will save us.
 
2013-02-18 09:33:41 PM  

Dumski: From the Wikipedia article on ZPG (Zero Population Growth)

In the late 1960s ZPG became a big political movement in the U.S. and parts of Europe, with strong links to environmentalism and feminism. Yale University was a stronghold of the ZPG activists who believed "that a constantly increasing population is responsible for many of our problems: pollution, violence, loss of values and of individual privacy."[8] Founding fathers of the movement were Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb, and Thomas Eisner. Ehrlich stated: "The mother of the year should be a sterlized woman with two adopted children."

My father was an OB/GYN in the '60s and 70's. I remember him wearing a ZPG button on his lab coat.
That was the thinking post baby boom, and he was a supporter of that cause. Geez Dad, what a waste of time.


Well, when you base retirement plans on Ponzi schemes you need more growth.

I'm not saying there's not room for more growth, but have you seen a graph of human population growth?

www.endangeredspecieshandbook.org

Population is a huge concern whether it's not having enough workers to support the old folks or so many people that resources like food, water and energy because a problem not to mention environmental concerns.

I'm sure we as a species will survive but we're going to have issues with population.
 
2013-02-18 09:34:10 PM  
Time to end planned parenthood.
 
2013-02-18 09:35:36 PM  

Pumpernickel bread: Well, fewer humans, particularly in developed countries is certainly better for maintaining the habitability of the earth, but governments depend on an ever-expanding tax-base to make good on those promises they made.


Private choices are too blame, too. Every retirement planning guide shows a WASPY couple that look 50 retiring to one of their fantastic beach homes, drinking wine and eating great food, before going on an all-inclusive cruise to the Caribbean. 

What they sometimes fail to note is that investment based retirement plans and Social Security share a common thread: They both require extracting wealth from future productivity to fund the retirement of old people.
 
2013-02-18 09:36:17 PM  

basemetal: More than 6 billion people in the world, we wont run out any time soon.

/governments are more worried about future tax revenue


exponential growth, how does it work?
 
2013-02-18 09:36:25 PM  
If you look at current and projected water shortages its simple to see that over-population is a real problem and there are not enough resources to sustain our current global population, never mind an additional few billion.

Babyboomers not being able to retire to a jet setting life of luxory like medieval Royalty shouldn't be the arbitrator of policies.  Unfortunately it is and western civilization looks to be committing suicide because of it.
 
2013-02-18 09:36:44 PM  

Ed Willy: GAT_00: Only if you're worried about the ratio of white people to everyone else.

Don't forget the Japanese. Half the incentive for creating robots is so they can avoid having to open their borders to permanent immigration.

Meanwhile, China one child policy mixed with their preference of boys means you'll have a generation of working class men with no females around.

Hmmm.... Maybe Japan and China can finally reach piece by trading Japanese sex bot technology to help the Chinese government from having a revolution of sexually frustrated men.


Japan's one of those wait and see cases.  I think they'll have to give in and open it up to immigration eventually.

China and India are more worrysome because that many single males is a pretty strong correlator to internal instability and warmongering.
 
2013-02-18 09:37:23 PM  

Mentat: The biggest side effect of the population leveling off is that once the baby boomers die off, there will be a massive world-wide worker shortage.  Countries will be fighting to let immigrants in.  It will be the greatest boon to the Middle Class since the Black Death.


Why? Really not saying you're totally right or wrong, but with reduced population comes... reduced demand.  Yes? No?

Again, it's more the matter of capitalism in a negative-growth environment.  It's not that capital can't demand gain on itself in a shrinking economy, but if it does, eventually *all* the rewards of the system go to the accumulated capital-holders.  It's plausible in a growing economy (which has largely been predicated on a growing population) because some of the gains go to labor (and demand) and some of them go to pay profit to capital-holders for holding capital.
 
2013-02-18 09:37:25 PM  

gingerjet: basemetal: More than 6 billion people in the world, we wont run out any time soon.

/governments are more worried about future tax revenue

When I was in elementry school in the 80s two things were taught - we will run out of oil by the year 2000 and over population will destroy this planet  And here we are - happily plugging along.

/lets talk about real problems like climat change and feed people - both are political problems


Every time you click the big button on this site the site's sponsors pay for a little over 1 cup of rice to feed the hungry. I have clicked daily for the last 13 years.

http://www.hungersite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=1
 
2013-02-18 09:37:35 PM  
3.bp.blogspot.com

Love will find a way.
 
2013-02-18 09:37:48 PM  
Open your legs, ladies. I'm here to help the country.
 
2013-02-18 09:39:29 PM  

Fubini: Fertility panic isn't so much related to overpopulation as it is to funding the old people's pensions. If we don't have enough young people we're going to have to go all soylent green on the old folks homes.


Japan and Italy are already zooming down that hill, with China right on their ass and picking up speed.

As a planet, we need to figure out how to deal with most people living to 80 and most women only having two or three kids. Not the old model of croaking at fifty and leaving behind six sickly kids.
 
2013-02-18 09:39:50 PM  
Don't forget that this story came from Hot Air and is FULL OF LIES.

The United States fertility rate, according the World Bank, not some idiot blogger, is a healthy 2.1.

https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sp _d yn_tfrt_in&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=united%20states%20fertility% 20rate
 
2013-02-18 09:40:35 PM  
It's Hot Air, so I'm going to assume that they mean "White fertility panic."
 
2013-02-18 09:41:03 PM  

Koodz: I'm with Gat on this one.  I see white racists complain about being out-bred by the browns all the time and all I can think is, "You can't stand your own women enough to fark them.  It's almost like subconsciously you aren't convinced of your own superiority after all."


Have you ever seen an attractive white supremacist?
 
2013-02-18 09:41:24 PM  

Ishkur: Yes, but the reasons are idiotic: They're not moral, or ethical, or survival, or even rational.

They're economic.

And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.

The solution, then, is not the keep increasing the population for economic prosperity's sake, but to throw away Capitalism entirely and adopt a new economic metric that doesn't rely on growth and profit as the be-all and end-all of human endeavor.

We have to change our priorities here.


I wish I could give this post the HERO tag. I also agree with this quote FTFA " If this is a new fad in government policy, I think I'll pass. Simply producing larger raw numbers of people is no substitute for a society where families produce the children they can love and afford to raise. "

Exactly. One of the reasons I don't have any children myself is because among my sibling there are more 15 nieces and nephews with my eldest brother has nine kids all to himself. He doesn't have any kids imo, what he's got is a human resources issue.
 
2013-02-18 09:42:16 PM  
Can I play the white male race card yet?
 
2013-02-18 09:45:14 PM  
Fertility alarmists in the US tend to be the same people who oppose immigration, working mothers and state spending.
 
2013-02-18 09:46:53 PM  

thermo: well you can blame me for lack of whatever the US average crotch fruit is for married couples. We are 43, I am snipped, and adoption is not on the table.


I'm pretty sure adoption won't change the birth rate at all. The kid's already been born
 
2013-02-18 09:46:56 PM  

Ishkur: Yes, but the reasons are idiotic: They're not moral, or ethical, or survival, or even rational.

They're economic.

And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.

The solution, then, is not the keep increasing the population for economic prosperity's sake, but to throw away Capitalism entirely and adopt a new economic metric that doesn't rely on growth and profit as the be-all and end-all of human endeavor.

We have to change our priorities here.


We're not ready to stop growth. A world wide GPD/Capita of $12,000 (PPP indexed) isn't exactly a super comfortable wage. Maybe when we get to the US's total we can stop concentrating on growth and start concentrating on wealth for a change. (Time=money, so wealth is the ability to spend your time not working.)

Lack of energy is the current inhibitor for growth. We need to find a way to extract more energy from this planet so that we can spread and harvest other planets (Jupiter, here we come!) I am pinning many of my hopes to ITER. Harnessing the power of fusion is still the future.
 
2013-02-18 09:49:24 PM  

MugzyBrown: Actually the structure of the faulty economics (not capitalism) put in place by most western gov'ts is what needs constant growth. Capitalism does not.


Explain.

(keep in mind that Capitalism relies on scarcity to operate and will be naturally cast aside in the distant future anyway as we approach post-scarcity civilization)
 
2013-02-18 09:49:58 PM  

frestcrallen: Fertility alarmists in the US tend to be the same people who oppose immigration, working mothers and state spending.


True, orthodox Jews, Mormons and various Christian evangelicals are into that "overwhelm the world with our spawn" thing.
 
2013-02-18 09:50:15 PM  

Ishkur: Yes, but the reasons are idiotic: They're not moral, or ethical, or survival, or even rational.

They're economic.

And the only reason why they're economic is because Capitalism only works under a policy of constant growth which simply is not possible in a finite system.

The solution, then, is not the keep increasing the population for economic prosperity's sake, but to throw away Capitalism entirely and adopt a new economic metric that doesn't rely on growth and profit as the be-all and end-all of human endeavor.

We have to change our priorities here.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, this is just crazy talk.
 
2013-02-18 09:50:23 PM  
GAT_00: Only if you're worried about the ratio of white people to everyone else.


previews.agefotostock.com

cdn.theatlanticcities.com

"Dreams of the future of humanity"

Paradise, eh, GAT_00?
 
2013-02-18 09:50:37 PM  

Happy Hours: I'm sure we as a species will survive but we're going to have issues with population.


I see your...

www.endangeredspecieshandbook.org

And raise you with what the UN actually thinks is going to happen...

thehaberboschprocess.files.wordpress.com

IOW, we're going to top out at about 50% higher than we are now.

Scary graphs are scary?
 
2013-02-18 09:51:02 PM  
farm4.staticflickr.com
 
Displayed 50 of 316 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report