/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11839555
stop your mom from fucking so many black men

>>11839570
damn you got me

As more countries develop, their populations tend to stabilize and their population growth rate decreases, this trend can be seen in current developed nations.

If countries like India (soon to be most populous country) develop, their population can also stabilize, I think the UN has stated that the 12th Billion person will never be born (This is out of memory, I apologize if I'm wrong) as the global birth rates and death rates will be roughly the same

In the worst case there will be a big famine. Regardless, the world's population will be kept under a certain number soon, I think.

>>11839555
Its not an issue. We're actually heading for a peak human population after which it will be a dive downwards. Expect population to start decreasing ~50 years from now.

>>11839555
it's only a problem if the population growing is sub 90 iq
e.g. niggers and the sand varients

An over population of people 120+ iq is not too daunting

>>11839555
Not too late yet considering there's still resources going around, but we're getting there.

Idk, I thought the WuFlu would be a great guilt free way to just let it happen, but you know, muh life is precious no matter how much of it is spent jerking off, watching TV, and spacing out.
Next bet? WW3 I guess, if it ever comes around. I mean fuck, if Iran didn't go for it back in January I don't know what it'll take besides an outright invasion.

The worst part is there a bunch of people everywhere that still think it's awesome to just have 7 children. Like they just want to spread their genes or race as far and wide as possible.
One would say go full China on everyone, but who would enforce a world-wide policy like that.

So, maybe hope and wish and pray the Gates sterilization vaccine conspiracy theory is true?


Oh shit I got it. We drive out to Yellowstone with as much tnt as we can carry and release Cthulhu.
Or just let Bronze Age Collapse: Modern Rehash take it's course.

>>11839703
If there were that many people with an IQ of 120 then their IQ wouldn't be 120 anymore.

>>11839703
Both Chinese and sub-saharan lifestyles look daunting to me

>>11839654
Proof?

>>11839604
Cool, we'll just wait for 200 years of African development while they make 1 billion babies per country

>>11839570
This OP, please

>>11839768
Obviously he means today's standards

>>11839555
We can delay it by eating bugs. That would reduce the need for farmland.

Also abortion.

Calories per person continue to rise despite population growth and by some measures we've about reached peak farmland. If the world farmed at the same intensity as the US than a far larger populationis sustainable, to say nothing of what is possible with better logistics, greenhouses, vertical farming.

From an environmental perspective, there are several possible major geoengineering projects that could be implemented. Difficult feats of engineering with likely adverse ecological effects, but they would absolutely be implemented before any malthusian apocalypse.

Let global warming melt all the ice

>>11839833
What about rising sea levels reducing land. Is the more land in an ice age or a tropical age?

>>11839753
>we want to avoid overpopulation because it would cause global catastrophe
>therefore the solution is to cause a catastrophe such as ww3 or hope for plague/yellowstone eruptions to wipe out half the population
Bit of a flawed line of thinking. If overpopulation ever becomes catastrophic then a lot of people will die and it will limit itself anyway.

>>11839839
Australia isn't very populated because it's mostly desert. More warm water=more rain and more habitable land.

>>11839555
We could easily sustain more people, we just have a retarded economic system where a small fraction of people hog all the resources.

>>11839872
Instead of raising minimum wage which increase inflation, why not just mandate a employees are payed are certain percentage of profit. Firing people and cutting hours can't work around that.

>>11839555
Educate and resolve social economic problems. That would be a broad way of putting it.

>>11839866
Hell yes I love saline water get all up in the few bits of arable land we have in this country.

>>11839866
How much of cretaceous earth was land, and how much was desert compared to today?

>>11839878
Why not just cease the means

>>11839890
Increase productivity? As in more work hours?

>>11839604
this is really contingent on countries developing though
is that a reasonable assumption to make? that they'll all reach this undefined level of development?

depending on what that minimum level of development is, we might be worse off
imagine 11 billion people living with western standards of energy consumption

>>11839921
I think its safe to assume that the 'muh develobment', 'muh wamens ebucation' people haven't really thought this through

Which makes sense, because there is undeniably lots of money to be made through both of those processes, particularly the first.

>>11839555
Overpopulation isn't real. Population has been below 8b for over 20 years and schizos have been complaining about overpopulation all the time.

>>11839890
>Why not just cease the means
I'm no commie but guys like bezos, musk, and branson might make that absolutely necessary. people will have no choice. either cease the means or die. simple

>>11839555
Universal income conditional on sterilization

>>11839878

The whole point of jobs versus entrepreneurship is that the business owner takes the risk of profits and the delay in recieving them. Workers expect wages to be consistent and paid immediately (within a week or two). Many firms have no profits for years or never turn a profit. Workers wouldn't tolerate waiting years for wages that may never come or else they'd launch their own business

>>11839921
lol yeah africa is gonna become as developed as western countries with plummeting birth rates. they surely have the human capital. don't worry about their increasing numbers at all, more ipads and they'll all be mastering calc 1 at 15 like white new zealanders or w/e

>>11839957
>below 8b for over 20 years
a lot longer than that actually. you could make your rhetoric bite a little better by adding a few zeroes. plus by doing that you could maybe win over some jesus utopia types as well.

>>11839975
>business owner takes the risk of profits
this is such a bullshit argument because the "business owners" hedge their "risks" by taking a great many "risks" at the same time and it's virtually never the case that all of them fail and they wind up destitute.

>>11839555
kill all the whites

>>11839975
>this is fair
>huuuur life's not fair
The paint of civilization is to make it fair

>>11839990

There's risk that's diversafiable and risk that isn't. You're ignoring the tradeoff of risk and return which is also risk versus time. Sure, you could buy "risk free" government bonds and make a fraction of a percent, but you'd wait ages to make anything, and workers rightly prefer to make money sooner.

Suppose it was possible to hedge all risks and make a consistent profit above the natural interest rate, do you propose that workers make a portion of ALL the businesses profits and not just the business they work for? That's just giving all workers the same amount, some portion of the country's/worlds profits. So you're idea isn't distinguishable from UBI.

>>11840198
So someone "hero businessman" takes a big risk with 1/10th of their wealth (which also happens to be 100s of times the average person's wealth) and it doesn't pay off. Cry me a fucking river.

>>11840198

Continuing, paying all people or even just all employees the same amount, even if it's just a portion of their income, effectively subsidizes people just for existing. This leads to higher population than one constrained by the need to earn wages by working jobs which generate value. Having to pay for your food, shelter, etc. creates a check against over population.

>>11839555
Stop giving shit to Africa and let them pump out so many babies that they end up killing themselves, same with India.

>>11840247

Im not saying anything about "hero businessmen." Im not saying businesses owners are morally better than employees. All I'm pointing out is compensating workers based on their employers profits isn't necessarily desirable for workers. And furthermore it is more likely to encourage an unsustainable population.

>>11840265
sure. fine.

>>11839604
This meme applied to Western countries well. It's not really holding up as the rest of the world develops, some places in the Middle East and Africa are having more children as they get wealthier, along with medical advances it's hard to say whether it will hold true.

Overpopulation is just a meme that the elites keep perpetuating to shame the lower class for existing.

>>11839555
My father used to tell me stories about the the old days, a time of peace when Gates kept balance between the blacks, whites, asians and Americans. But all that changed when the 3rd world attacked. Only Gates mastered vaccine sterilizations. Only he could stop overpopulation, but when the world needed him most, he vanished.

>>11839555
Fertility rate has been going down, even in developing nations like China and India, and underdeveloped nations in Africa. This trend is set to continue as time passes and countries start to develop even further.

>>11839555
Countries like China and India, have reached a fertility rate of below 2.2, which is considered the replacement fertility rate, and the population in those regions are supposed to peak around 2030-2040.
The only countries that are considerably above the replacement rate lie mostly in Africa. This is one of the main arguments for why we should focus on developing Africa, as there is a direct correlation between how developed a country is and how low their fertility rate is.

>>11839604
>India (soon to be most populous country)
India is already the most populous country if you only add Bangladesh

>>11840655
Once again, you need human capital to become developed. The average African IQ is sub 90, and that's with proper nutrition and education.

>>11840677
>there is a direct correlation between how developed a country is and how low their fertility rate is
It's probably way more complicated than that (correlation vs. causation). You're assuming culture and religion doesn't play a role in fertility rates. I think it does, probably more than we realize.

>>11840677
Africa is just fucked beyond repair. HIV and AIDS are already rampant there. The cost to bring them to the 1st world level would be immense, each individual with HIV alone requires thousands per year for treatment and preventative aid, not to mention the high fertility rate is already exacerbating the HIV pandemic by itself, while HIV deaths cause massive fertility rates and steep life-death pyramids. Their infrastructure is already fucked beyond repair, and the average IQ isn't conducive for further industrialization at this point. Not to mention the land is shit for farming, and the Sahara is already expanding, so kiss any farmland remotely close to the Sahara goodbye. Rampant warlords, drug abuse, racial discrimination (not just between whites and blacks btw, hutus and tutsis for example), child soldiers/slaves (blood diamonds), ect. There's no repairing it, we just have to tell it goodbye, any foreign aid just goes into making their problems worse, and their people more dependent on us.

>>11839604
>>11839654
>>11840655
>>11840677
Brainlets. The so-called demographic transition is eventually going to reverse itself, as natural selection does its work.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/breeders-revenge/

1. Stop sending food to Africa
2. Sterilize India and China
Problem solved

>>11839821
How will the farming capacity of the US be affected once the worldwide oil availability begins to tank? We'll need access to full-electric farm equipment within the century. Then our capacity will potentially be throttled by the rate of energy production from renewables and some nuclear. That cost will be exported to consumers.
>>11839872
The economic system is flawed. I fail to see any reason why we need more people though. A new social contract needs to be devised that guarantees a survival baseline for all human beings regardless of job availability (within reason, obviously complicated issues here), and that deal can only be made by taking responsibility for maintaining population stagnation or regression with adequate returns of value from those who can work. Everyone who continues contributing value can benefit from additional profits in proportion to their own contributions - after everyone is fed, sheltered, and clothed. Unauthorized mouths to feed will not be accepted into this world from groups that don't contribute. Have fun hashing out that selection process and the inevitable PC shitstorm that will not tolerate such language (which coincidentally is the same side of people who are ensuring that the status quo of infinite, unending economic growth policies be maintained). This is a conversation that needs to breach into the public sphere, and I don't really know how to get it there. No country can adopt it with great effect without general worldwide acceptance, because too many places just can't stop shitting out more people. This crazy artificial rat race needs to be toned down and have a governor installed. The world took physical possessions and amenities too seriously, and we've lost our culture and global identities. Dare I say we risk losing our humanity in favor of the next iPhone and streaming service original series to avoid social interaction.
>>11839878
>>11839975
>>11839990
>>11840046
>>11840198
>>11840247
>>11840252
>>11840265

>>11840780
>This crazy artificial rat race needs to be toned down and have a governor installed
You mean like a world government?

>>11839555
we have an underpopulation problem, fertility rates are declining and most countries have a birthrate under 2.0

>>11840815
That's not a problem. Our population should decrease until we no longer overshoot the amount of resources the Earth can provide every year.

>>11840709
>alternative facts
>dysgenics will destroy IQ
I regret clicking that link. You people are fucking retarded.

>>11839975
>muh small businesses are the same thing as multi-national corporations
There is no such thing as risk. The entire global economy has been working for more than a century to reduce risk as much as possible. Everything from data science to the investment in computer science to various socio-political measures (including trillions in government bail outs at this point) has completely disrupted the natural economic flow of the world.
There is no fucking risk. The only businesses operating under risk fail immediately. If the business exists, it has been insulated against risk. This is why there are so many fucking tech start-ups that are literally worthless and have zero or even negative market value when they go public, but the owners and investors still walk with billions because the bill is footed onto the workers and tax payers of developed nations and the modern equivalent of slave-labor in developing nations.

There is no fucking risk. You're parroting 50 year-old aphorisms that are functionally propaganda at this point.

>>11840847
>the natural economic flow of the world

>>11840824
>Our population should decrease until we no longer overshoot the amount of resources the Earth can provide every year.
Except we aren’t overshooting the amout of resources Earth can provide evrey year.

>>11840874
Why are you lying? It's called "Earth Overshoot Day" for a reason.

>>11839555
the world's surface is like 10% used, the only overpopulation is in hyper-concentrated cities where everyone wants to live in the same place

>>11839555
It'll solve it'self, just like when any species grows past the available resources

>>11840895
Obviously, the question is which peoples will survive? My bet isn't on the white people.

>>11840898
Not that that's a bad thing.

>>11840839
>alternative facts
Where does it say that?

A huge population contraction would be great. There are way too many fucking people on this planet and that only benefits the rich.

The big redpill is that stupid people have way more kids than smart people so civilisation is absolutely fucked in the long run. Best hope for humanity is space colonisation and then selectively filtering the applicants for colonisation of other planets.

>>11840878
their is plenty of resources left in Earth’s crust to mine

>>11839555
Overpopulation isn't a human problem. The fact that we are aware of this population size is why we are unironically too intelligent as an organism to be seriously impacted by it. However, we can deal with it by looking for new ways to create foods and find new water resources. Start putting college kids in these majors

>>11841208
>The fact that we are aware of this population size is why we are unironically too intelligent as an organism to be seriously impacted by it
ehehehehehehehehehe

>>11840785
Given the asymmetry of military and economic power due to the US, I don't see the implementation of a worldwide government being created from grass roots, or it being an entity to be trusted. >>11841208
>>11841219
The education system fostering STEM undergrad, grad, and doctorates has already been structured to halt any meaningful salary growth from the vast increase in work visa issuance since the 1990s. With the salary market freeze in place for educated workers, what incentive do they have to continue pursuing those fields? In addition, a large percentage of degree-holding people cannot even work in their respective field due to a labor surplus.

Look up square miles of florida. Convert to square feet. Divide by 7billion. Every one would get 210 square feet roughly.

If we do like the biggest states it comes out to every one getting 15,000square feet. We all could have a mansion. In america not fill up all of america nor have a single person on any other continent... For us to get over populated we would need to r ach 100-140billion. But by creat 7 story tall mansions we would still be fine...

If we were to become a self aware world and do this. Every one could grow gardens and have green houses to grow food year round... Thus no worries of starvation.. solar panels win turbines and water turbines.. and people build water collection roofs so we everyone could use basic steam engines. Then we would get cheap energy sufficient devices for elevators or cars... Honestly. Humans are so rushed we take 20mph for granted... Crossing 200miles in 10hours is a feet premitive humans would have thought impossible.. humans have to stay so busy now adays if you have a 2day weekend and free time to live .. you are seen as a lazy slob to people working 2full time jobs and a weekend job... Sounds just like nothing has changed in 100 years... And these people are still broke and poor....

Washing clothes use to only be water and soap... Now you have to pay to wash your clothes and dry your clothes... Taking shits and pissing use to be free. Now you have to pay for every flush. Dragon ball GT when goku went to the planet where everything in the hotel cost money to use... We live on that planet...

>>11839890
>trusting retarded proles

>>11839785
African countries's birth rate will drop once a speck of civilization is seen in the country. Compare India/Pakistan birth rate as well.

>>11841407
Nigeria and Niger are already seeing the slope. Ethopia is already on downward fall.

>>11839866
Australia's problem isn't just water it is also soil depletion. Australia has dead soil with very little nutrients in it. The only way to make Australia fertile again on a large scale would be to somehow create volcanos that could lay down thick layers of ash that then would be watered and turn into nutrient rich soil.
Contrast to the Sahara which was lush with vegetation during human history. The soil there is full of nutrients. They just need to get fresh water into the area and they can start turning that desert into productive agricultural land.

>>11840780
>How will the farming capacity of the US be affected once the worldwide oil availability begins to tank?
The US has 40 million pieces of obsolete farm equipment that could be put back into use.

>>11841415
>not importing fertilizer and using compost
the problem isn’t as big as you think

>>11839555
You can't.
I stopped worrying about it few years ago and accepted the fact that my kids and grandkids will have to live in fortress buildings like in Brazil and South Africa. There will be no political shift against mass immigration.

>>11839604
Back in the 80s the UN was predicting african population growth would have already slow down, it hasn't happened. Because
1) africans were unable to develop despite having an upstart in terms of infrastructures
2) culturally having a shitton of kids (even when you can barely feed them) is how they assert wealth

The demographic transition is an extrapolation not applying to africans.

>>11839958
Most of the "value" is trapped in finacial derivatives and schemes, not actual infrastructures and production
Ironically Musk or Bezos wealth are more legitimate because they at least provide services and products.
In the meantime Wall Street wealth is based on usury where bankers impose interests on money they created out of thin air.
We live in an everything bubble because of this Keynesian system.

>>11841431
I believe you missed the point - that equipment will rely on chemical energy of fossil fuels that will become depleted in the not-so-distant future. You'd be unable to convert the vast majority of that equipment to full electric power without comparable costs of creating new equipment. More importantly, the maximum amount of acquirable energy will be the amount we can generate from renewables on a daily basis. We will no longer have the luxury of pre-stored energy from oil that accumulated for vast spans of time. I am not aware of the new power capacity of the US or the world once oil is gone; given our current state of affairs, I'd venture to say it is currently much lower to the point that modern day life for civilians would change drastically to reduce energy consumption. Industries will have privileged access to the remaining energy grid to keep the world turning.

>>11842610
Anon, I think he is talking about niggers.

>>11839555
Targeted sterilization via nanobots.

>>11842711
HA

Is there a forum out there where people are more serious about science? I like jokes too, but I like to actually commit myself to discussion too. /x/...I mean /pol/...I mean /sci/ is just not a place for being serious, and I'm getting tired of it.

>>11841411
Fucking seven
The fuck
I now support bill gates mass sterilizing Africans

>>11841415
Why is it dead?

Too not to...

There is no problem, invent something.

>>11839890

cease you

>>11841411
>>11841407
>>11840677
>>11840655
>>11839604
>Africa will get richer and mechanically stop having so many kids... anytime now...

That's just an assumption based on what happened in Asia. But for decades now, with each consecutive report, the UN are adjusting their population and fertility forecasts for africa upwards, because they just won't follow the asian curve.

>>11842950
>That's just an assumption
It's literally happening though, you can see the falling birth rates in basically every country.

>>11842954
Well hopefully they don't drop too much. That would be an absolute disaster for world economic growth and many of the biggest wealth generating industries would cease to exist.

>>11842950
The truth is that africa is different. Wealth does not directly impact fertility, what does are the changes in their way of life that are causes or the consequences of wealth.
In particular, in asia, what brought the birth rates down was the shift from rural economies to industrial, urban economies. Women went to work in factories and couldn't take care of as many children as they could on the farm.
But in africa the starting point was different : women were traditionally doing most of the work in the rural economy, and developped familial structures to take care of the kids. These structures persisted as the economy changed over the last decades, allowing women to keep having lots of kids despite their jobs.

https://www.hoover.org/research/africa-2050-demographic-truth-and-consequences

>>11842954
>the curve is going downwards so it's falling
The assumption is not that it is decreasing, but that it is decreasing as quickly as it did elsewhere, and that assumption is proven wrong every time we check.

>>11842997
I said birth rates are falling which they are. Not sure if stupid or "merely pretending" as they say.

>>11843006
>the curve is going downwards so it's falling
Not sure if stupid or "merely pretending" as they say.

>>11839555
Sterilize all ugly people

I think it is too late, billions of people will die, but they wouldn't have died if they weren't not never born. I think we need to set up a penal colony on Mars ASAP. Another option is promoting war between India and China.

>>11839604
Low fertility in not an ESS, idiot. + Massive population momentum.

>>11842985
Africa’s Birthrates are still falling

>>11843040
Going down is not necessarily falling.
My point is that they didn't go down as fast as planned in past projections.

>>11840859
Not an argument, fuckhead.

>>11843055
>Going down is not necessarily falling.

>>11843078
Yes, unless you're trying to misrepresent a problem.

>>11843094
They are synonyms, they literally mean the same thing

>>11843055
COVID should make the birthrates fall more

>>11839555
>Overpopulation
no such thing
also, check'd

>>11840707
>Crimea is officially classified as part of Russia
kek, nice

>>11839555
I suggest by research on how it could be ethically limited. One thing is education. It reduces average number of a woman's children.

Kill everyone now. Condone first degree murder. Advocate cannibalism.

I don't think over-population is a problem yet. It's also a self-solving problem. Changes in supply and demand create economic incentives that solves global population-resource imbalances as they develop. For example if standards of living start dropping (most) people will have less kids, and so there will be less people in the next generation = less demand on resources = problem solved. And with global population so high there are that many more inventors to accelerate living standards with new technologies. It is technological innovations which are the driver behind increased living standards. There's a long way that science can go in terms of developing more sustainable and healthy food supply systems.

Supply and Demand: This solves most global issues of resource imbalances naturally. When there is food shortages meat costs will rise, lowering it's demand.

>>11843055
>My point is that they didn't go down as fast as planned in past projections.
Because Urbanization is slower in Africa. In many countries the rate is still falling as they develop and/or urbanize.

>>11842997
Because projections aren't really 100% accurate

>>11842293
It's because a lot of shit happens in the 80's political conflict, civil war, oil price quackery, the cold war and more

>1) africans were unable to develop despite having an upstart in terms of infrastructures
False. Colonial infrastructure was extremely limited to only a few select areas and was not built to cater towards the needs of a real nation over the needs of a colony. Gabon had Port-Gentil which the French built no road connecting to any other place in the colony at all.

>>11840708
https://www.un.org/africarenewal/web-features/new-hiv-infections-are-falling-dramatically-africa

Our plan is working wonders.

We convinced millennials they have to go to college. Also increased the number of degrees less likely to get a higher paying job, but that is just the cherry on top. By our numbers even if you become an accountant you will still be so burdened with student loans during your prime child bearing years, that makes it is less likely you will have children. If you do you certainly will have less children.

As for China and India the problem solves it self. Just wait!

>>11844703
Not everybody needs to go to an expensive accounting school to be an accountant, dummy. Let's do some basic accounting, shall we?

>>11844529
>Because projections aren't really 100% accurate
That's quite an euphemism when there's a 100% error margin for the 2004 projection compared to the 2015 projection.
But alright, next time you're saying that overpopulation in africa is under control or not a problem, add "according to inaccurate projections".

>>11844523
>Because Urbanization is slower in Africa.
That's more complicated than that.
> First, northern and southern Africa did in fact follow the pattern of other regions, as would be expected; it is only eastern, middle, and western Africa that have not done so. Second, even for the latter regions, the rate and amount of their fertility decline is not comparable to what happened in other developing regions at similar levels of income and development. According to Bongaarts and Casterline, “… the median pace of change in sub-Saharan Africa (0.03 per year) is less than one-third the pace in the other regions [Asia and Latin America] (0.12 and 0.13, respectively).”10 Indeed, the behavior of fertility in sub-Saharan Africa is wholly at odds with the idea that economic progress determines the pace of fertility decline; as Bongaarts has shown, fertility rose when the region’s GDP/capita was relatively high in the 1970s, then began the onset of fertility decline in the early 1990s, when GDP/capita had fallen considerably, and then encountered a widespread stall in fertility decline in the 2000s, when GDP/capita had been rising more rapidly.11

But the reasons don't matter so much. It remains that development lowers fertility in middle africa more slowly than in the rest of the world, and that the coming century is bringing a population explosion in this area, which along with changing climate (not to mention political and economical retardation) is likely to become a catastrophe for africans, and consecutively for the regions where they will try to take refuge.

>>11844542
>Gabon had Port-Gentil which the French built no road connecting to any other place in the colony at all.
>Oh noes, they built a port but not the roads ! we sure are worse off than countries where no port was built

>>11839604
>>11839555
Overpopulation is absolutely NOT a problem. There is no academic study of it being one. The people who keep pushing this idea are generally doing so are usually ideologically/politically motivated.

>>11839555
We don't solve it. We solve ways to survive and to thrive, even as they carry out solutions.

>>11839753
World wars don’t really put a dent in population growth, bealive it or not

>>11840677
>we should
We would but everyone cry’s nwo-conneyism. Also the total aid to Africa is the same as 50 fucking marshal plans over the last 50 years,

>>11845809
They do the opposite. They usually trigger a boom.

>>11840677
google is outright putting lies and misinformation out there now. brazil's birth rate is less than 2 yet its population is increasing. what a crock of shit.

>>11839555
>How do we solve the overpopulation problem /sci/?
Why genocide of course

One child law again also feed the excess people to the wolves

>>11846896
That means more people are still being born than are dying.
Because there still isn't that many old people yet.

>>11846953
i simply do not trust them and do not believe them any more.

>>11846953
why should i, with their blatant censorship and overt bias

>>11846930
This but instead of China going full retard by killing girls only excess male infants should be killed so as to create a gender imbalance with 2:1 females to males or more

>>11846993
You get one shot, one opportunity.

>>11839555
shame women into having no more than 2 crotch fruit

>>11839555
Stop giving food to africa

>>11840709
This. No population can be negative forever or else face extinction.

>>11845733
This is pure delusion.
Learn basic biology

>>11839872
>We could easily sustain more people,
Why would we want to, though?
There are too many niggers as it its.

>>11848632
>Why would we want to, though?
Because population growth sustains a huge portion of the economy.

>>11848636
>muh shekels

>>11848645
yup. average standard of living drops without population growth. of course, some industries depend on it more than others.

>>11845820
>Also the total aid to Africa is the same as 50 fucking marshal plans over the last 50 years,

Lol that statement is s fucked up it's hard where to start with how flawed it is. Africa is 55 nations of extremely varying history and background compared to the handful of Euro states that got Marshall aid

>>11845711
Well kinda makes having a port useless if you can't even shit anything within your country to it.

>>11845658
>But alright, next time you're saying that overpopulation in africa is under control or not a problem, add "according to inaccurate projections".
The longer you make your projectionist them roe inaccurate they'll be anon. For example pretty sure no one in 2010 expected the Coronovirus at all.

>>11849332
Also how Aid is doled out versus the Marshall Plan which Europe never needed is completely different.

There is literally nothing wrong with one-child policy as long as it's not done the way China did it. Perhaps only incentivizing instead of punishing could be a solution. Though I think we absolutely need to change any laws that allow people to pump out babies as an easier way to earn money than getting a fucking job.