@perplexity,
perplexity wrote::eek:
Believe it or not, the assessent of over population is usually based upon the principle of sustainabilty.
To complete the education try the
Population Reference Bureau
---
Thanks for the web site, it's very interesting. Although over population is spoken about in reference to resources, it doesn't explain much, does it.
For example, to sustain a US citizen, xxxxx carbon dioxide is produced. For a South American citizen xx carbon dioxide is produced.
Does that mean that we should aim for the South American model because the US model is unsustainable?
It doesn't mean this, does it?
Another example. The US consumption of calories is not mentioned, but I would think that it would average around 3500 calories (I am just guessing this), that would be 2000 calories more than the body requires.
That would mean that in any study of over population, the study of over consumption of food and resources should also be taken into consideration.
If this was taken seriously, a good case could be argued in favour of the Chinese (for example), with their low birth rate and food and resources consumption, and a case against the US model.
The population could increase ten fold, or more, and with reasonable use of the resources, I guess most could be happy. The planet is covered by two thirds water, under this water are more resources untapped.
Talking about the population is necessary, but calling it over population is incorrect. A bigger problem in the west is over eating. This is the biggest wasteful use of resources. More people die at an early age because of over eating than any other cause.