The universe according to MMM

[jeffandnicole]

...People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

You know what's funny about this?  People worried about the effects of overpopulation 25 years ago.  In that timespan, you and many others were born, and now your generation is worried about the same thing.  If the previously generation could actually do something about it, many people in your generation would not exist today.

[kalvado]

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Literally imagine if 2 people just started appearing every second on your street, and this continued around the clock 24/7/365. That's insane when you think of it.

[kphoger]

I'm afraid to say this in that baby thread, because certain users will instantly cry "Eugenics!" but I have to say I am baffled by the lack of logic. People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

I don't think that I spend a particular large amount of time worrying about either.

Same here.

Overpopulation is a problem that tends to solve itself.  Watch China's population crater over the next 3 decades as an example.

This.  Societies that are less industrialized tend to have the larger population growth, whereas societies that are more industrialized tend to have the smaller population growth.  There is a lag to those two trend lines, and there are bound to be exceptions, but that's the general truth.

[GaryV]

I'm afraid to say this in that baby thread, because certain users will instantly cry "Eugenics!" but I have to say I am baffled by the lack of logic. People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

You realize that in many developed nations, the population is going down? Some of them are really worried about it.

[Roadgeekteen]

I'm afraid to say this in that baby thread, because certain users will instantly cry "Eugenics!" but I have to say I am baffled by the lack of logic. People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

You realize that in many developed nations, the population is going down? Some of them are really worried about it.

Immigration is the only reason why the population in America is not going down.

[kalvado]

I'm afraid to say this in that baby thread, because certain users will instantly cry "Eugenics!" but I have to say I am baffled by the lack of logic. People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

You realize that in many developed nations, the population is going down? Some of them are really worried about it.

The population isn't going down anywhere. Maybe the rate of increase is, but it is always a net gain. The top 20 countries with the live feeds of population have never dropped in number, maybe they take an extra few seconds than normal to click up by 1, but they've never decreased. And if the immigration theory for the US is true, than that would also explain decreases in where they were coming from. Goes both ways.

It is involved. Right now, people born in 1930s-1940s are expiring, mortality is growing. It is projected to grow till 2050 or so,
predicted dynamics is interesting:

And you may keep in mind that certain other places which export people to US are still growing.  For one, Philippines average  2.8 births  per woman - compared to 1.8 in US

[kphoger]

The population isn't going down anywhere. Maybe the rate of increase is, but it is always a net gain. The top 20 countries with the live feeds of population have never dropped in number, maybe they take an extra few seconds than normal to click up by 1, but they've never decreased. And if the immigration theory for the US is true, than that would also explain decreases in where they were coming from. Goes both ways.

No.  You are wrong.

Example:  Hungary's total population has declined every single year since 1981, yet Hungary has a positive net migration rate.

[Scott5114]

I'm afraid to say this in that baby thread, because certain users will instantly cry "Eugenics!" but I have to say I am baffled by the lack of logic. People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

Oh, no, it's not eugenics in this case. All of the light tan countries in this map are losing population if you look strictly at birth rates and ignore migration.


The only place where overpopulation is a potential problem is sub-Saharan Africa. So if you're actually worried about overpopulation, you're either misinformed or racist, not a eugenicist.

[kalvado]

I'm afraid to say this in that baby thread, because certain users will instantly cry "Eugenics!" but I have to say I am baffled by the lack of logic. People worry about the effects of climate change 50 to 100 years from now, but not the negative effects of overpopulation in 25 years.

Oh, no, it's not eugenics in this case. All of the light tan countries in this map are losing population if you look strictly at birth rates and ignore migration.


The only place where overpopulation is a potential problem is sub-Saharan Africa. So if you're actually worried about overpopulation, you're either misinformed or racist, not a eugenicist.

saying "loosing" ignores the rise in life expectancy. As long as it continues growing, fertility rate <2 may still result in population growth.
</ nitpicking>

[kalvado]

Isn't the worldwide average between 1 and 2 anyway?

2.3 per Mighty Google

[thspfc]

I wonder what the US' ideal population change rate would be. I suspect it's a similar situation to inflation, we don't want it to be too high but we don't want it to be stagnant or decreasing.

[kalvado]

I wonder what the US' ideal population change rate would be. I suspect it's a similar situation to inflation, we don't want it to be too high but we don't want it to be stagnant or decreasing.

It is significantly limited by the need to take care and support of eldery. I don't think this is about plain numbers per se.
Even if there are retirement savings in the bank, total society output has to be sufficient to feed current workers, grow kids, and support retired. As of right now, that is not the case, at it will only be worse with baby boomers.
Future is either significant increase of productivity, drop of living standards, or bankruptcy. Or finding foreign sponsors as it worked so far.

[Roadgeekteen]

I wonder what the US' ideal population change rate would be. I suspect it's a similar situation to inflation, we don't want it to be too high but we don't want it to be stagnant or decreasing.

It is significantly limited by the need to take care and support of eldery. I don't think this is about plain numbers per se.
Even if there are retirement savings in the bank, total society output has to be sufficient to feed current workers, grow kids, and support retired. As of right now, that is not the case, at it will only be worse with baby boomers.
Future is either significant increase of productivity, drop of living standards, or bankruptcy. Or finding foreign sponsors as it worked so far.

Or robots will take care of the old.

[kphoger]

I wonder what the US' ideal population change rate would be. I suspect it's a similar situation to inflation, we don't want it to be too high but we don't want it to be stagnant or decreasing.

It is significantly limited by the need to take care and support of eldery. I don't think this is about plain numbers per se.
Even if there are retirement savings in the bank, total society output has to be sufficient to feed current workers, grow kids, and support retired. As of right now, that is not the case, at it will only be worse with baby boomers.
Future is either significant increase of productivity, drop of living standards, or bankruptcy. Or finding foreign sponsors as it worked so far.

Yes.  The population tree is more important than raw numbers.  How many young people? middle-aged people? elderly people?  You need enough young workers to make the economy run, pay for social services, and take care of the old folks.

I've heard analyses that Russia, for example, is unsustainable as a society for this reason–that no society with a population tree that looks like Russia's has avoided collapse.

[kalvado]

I wonder what the US' ideal population change rate would be. I suspect it's a similar situation to inflation, we don't want it to be too high but we don't want it to be stagnant or decreasing.

It is significantly limited by the need to take care and support of eldery. I don't think this is about plain numbers per se.
Even if there are retirement savings in the bank, total society output has to be sufficient to feed current workers, grow kids, and support retired. As of right now, that is not the case, at it will only be worse with baby boomers.
Future is either significant increase of productivity, drop of living standards, or bankruptcy. Or finding foreign sponsors as it worked so far.

Or robots will take care of the old.

And that is exactly what "productivity increase" means. Less manhours to achieve same results

A lot of human history can be interpreted in terms of "how many people can one peasant feed". From earlier days of "entire family works, and can feed babies and pay a little to landlord" to today's mostly urban population.
Some argue that there is already too much productivity. Lavish 12+4 school and college is to keep people out of workforce. France reduced full time week to 35 hours as far as I remember.

[Max Rockatansky]

Or a dual purpose solution, just upload the consciousness of old people into the robots, no need to deal with a frail body then.

Yes, enslave the elderly in a stock Cylon worker bodies.

[Roadgeekteen]

Or a dual purpose solution, just upload the consciousness of old people into the robots, no need to deal with a frail body then.

Mind uploading is certainly an interesting concept. But what you are advocating for is kinda creepy.

[Max Rockatansky]

Or a dual purpose solution, just upload the consciousness of old people into the robots, no need to deal with a frail body then.

Mind uploading is certainly an interesting concept. But what you are advocating for is kinda creepy.

Omni Consumer Products has been working out the kinks:

[Max Rockatansky]

Do you want to instigate the Butlerian Jihad?

[kalvado]

Well to be honest it didn't work out well in black mirror, but Verizon would seriously have to stop the throttling bullshit if my consciousness is going to be in the cloud.

You would only have to worry about throttling if there are enough good thought to go around. Throttling bullshit is actually beneficial for those with too much bull

[Roadgeekteen]

That's a good topic lol, who are on this forum would internet companies throttle if their consciousness was uploaded to the servers?

Your consciousness, for one.

[kalvado]

That's a good topic lol, who are on this forum would internet companies throttle if their consciousness was uploaded to the servers?

Your consciousness, for one.

That assumes there is actually something to throttle....

[vdeane]

I wonder what the US' ideal population change rate would be. I suspect it's a similar situation to inflation, we don't want it to be too high but we don't want it to be stagnant or decreasing.

It is significantly limited by the need to take care and support of eldery. I don't think this is about plain numbers per se.
Even if there are retirement savings in the bank, total society output has to be sufficient to feed current workers, grow kids, and support retired. As of right now, that is not the case, at it will only be worse with baby boomers.
Future is either significant increase of productivity, drop of living standards, or bankruptcy. Or finding foreign sponsors as it worked so far.

To be fair, if everyone on Earth lived as middle class Americans do, we'd need six Earths.  So unless the third world remains in poverty, a significant drop in living standards would seem to be in our future regardless.

[kkt]

Or a dual purpose solution, just upload the consciousness of old people into the robots, no need to deal with a frail body then.

Mind uploading is certainly an interesting concept. But what you are advocating for is kinda creepy.

And cribbed from Star Trek.

[Scott5114]

I used to think it would be cool to have a robot body. I no longer trust the tech industry to not completely overmonetize such tech, however. I have enough things to worry about without adding the planned obsolescence of my right elbow onto the pile.