At what point are we 'old'?

I've always said the white elephant in the room is overpopulation. Perhaps another issue just as bad is distribution of population (i.e. population density).
The whole idea that population is such a problem is outdated. The countries with the greatest impact tends to be those with low birth rates. The few countries with high birth rates are poor countries, whose carbon footprint is tiny.

The obvious methds of lowering birth rates are being enacted (education, family planning etc.), but even if we drove this further, and caused more of the problems associated with a declining population, we would still see a world population figure going up, and its not just birth rate, but also the age at which people die that affects the population number, so as a country develops, people become healthier, they live longer, meaning that even if a birth rate goes down, the population can still increase.

The population is set to level off at about 10billion (give or take), but this is lower than previously thought.

This is a level that we can cope with as long as we work out how to enact sustainable economic policies. Ie. green growth - which we aren't close to doing. The idea that we won't cope with that population once developed, assumes our technology/system are static in ability. It isn't, sa we have always improved how efficient we produce food etc.

I highly recommend Gapminder for anyone who feels pessimistic about population.
Population talk here:
Further videos here:
 
Sponsored Links
Another example of an old man prejudiced against the young.
Another keyboard warrior who knows very little about me, (only what can be gleaned from my posts on here), but thinks he knows me like the back of his hand.

Technically I am old enough in years lived to be referred to as an OAP, however, that doesn't mean I have the mind, or outlook, of a feeble, dementia afflicted person sitting in an old peoples home with nothing to do all day except reminisce on the 'good old days'.
 
Funnily enough...

"Prince Philip said that he would like to be reincarnated as a deadly virus as a form of revenge against human overpopulation"

How many (legitimate) children did he have?
 
Sponsored Links
I simply quoted what you said, and commented on it

You betray yourself.
You quoted from my original post, "The youth of today......."
You then state that it is an example "of an old man prejudiced against the young."

I don't see how having an opinion about someone/something can be classed as a prejudice unless it classes everyone/everything of that group as being the same. I clearly stated further on in my original post that ""Not all todays youth are critical of the older ones amongst us, (some I come into contact with even have respect for us), but the vast majority think the world owes them a living even though they have not contributed anything to it yet. ""
 
The youth of today blame everything on the older generation.
We are destroying the planet because of our use of plastic, smoking, mining fossil fuels, flying large aircraft, driving round in diesel/petrol powered vehicles, etc, etc, etc.

Just remind me which generation it was that walk 3 miles or more to school each day, then back home again with a bag full of homework books, regardless of the weather. Who travelled by public transport all over the country because only the rich had cars and went abroad for holidays. Who used paper bags/canvas sacks/wickerwork baskets for their shopping. Bought their meat from butchers, their fruit & veg from greengrocers and their various other shopping such as sugar, butter, milk, eggs etc from local family run shops. We ate what we were given with the understanding that if we didn't like it then we got nothing else. A case of eat it or go hungry till the next meal. Very few people suffered from allergies because we didn't continually sanitise everything in sight, destroying our natural bodily defence systems. Gave old clothes, bits of iron, copper, brass, newspapers, much repaired but finally broken household machines to people who came collecting things by pulling a cart be either horse or hand.
Who stood in the street when it was raining/snowing/blowing a gale to make an important phone call to a doctor/hospital because someone was seriously ill, from a call box used by many different strangers or, if you were wealthy, from a phone firmly attached to a wall by a wire so you couldn't walk around with it and had to make your calls after 6.00pm when it was cheap rate. We either wore hand-me-down clothes or clothes that had been stitched/darned/knitted etc because buying new ones every month simply wasn't an option. Going out for a drink was a weekend treat because we were working too damned hard during the week to have the energy, or the money, to go out every night as if it was a God given right. We did chores around the house, ran errands for neighbours and had part time jobs when we were school children because it was the only way we could have our own little bit of money.

Not all todays youth are critical of the older ones amongst us, (some I come into contact with even have respect for us), but the vast majority think the world owes them a living even though they have not contributed anything to it yet. They think they should be able to have the latest gadgets, (which usually use a lot of non-recyclable plastics, electronics etc and even those that are re-cyclable are often just dumped somewhere or thrown in a bin). They go on foreign holidays using large aircraft, after being driven to the airport in daddys/mummys large gas guzzler vehicle. Buy fashionable clothes at extortionate prices that have often been manufactured in eastern sweatshops by children younger than themselves, and carry them home in large coloured plastic bags which they then throw in the bin. Smoke these vaping gadgets, (more plastic), which are then, also, thrown away. Have lived such a sterile lifestyle that they have virtually no immunity from the slightest airborne bacteria and have allergies unknown when we were that age. Have turned to be being vegetarians, (or worse, vegans!), forgetting that mankind is actually carnivorous and needs meat in their diet for the human body to function correctly. They cannot be subjected to any form of stress because it will affect their stability and make them feel insecure, this in turn will not allow them to cope with simple tasks such as being in a room with other people, (unless it's at a rave with a thousand other screaming, sweating, individuals all rubbing shoulders together because they are crammed into a small place!).

I think thats enough for now.
DTfS.gif
 
Is there correlation between population and poverty.
People on average, are wealthier today than they were in the past, even though population levels were a lot lower.
Define poverty...

And you have to remember that a very few people own a large percentage of the world's 'wealth' which skews the 'average' figure...

How many people had to rely on food banks a decade ago, and how many now in the UK alone?
 
How many (legitimate) children did he have?
More than 2.4 that we know of, but who knows however many more...

If a former PM can't count offspring then how could we have expected an immigrant royal to come clean over his number?
 
One car, a 40” smart TV, basic Sky package, 50mbps broadband or lower and an iPhone 7 per household.
In that case I'm poor. Can I apply for a grant to get all this tech?

None of the above are necessary to have a decent standard of living, but there are those who think they are...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm. Showing your racist tendencies again?
You really don't have a clue about any term whatsoever do you...

Care to tell us of the nationality of Philip?

Are you ok with royal immigrants and not with others?

But you do seem to be hell bent on proving that Orwell was right!
 
The whole idea that population is such a problem is outdated. The countries with the greatest impact tends to be those with low birth rates. The few countries with high birth rates are poor countries, whose carbon footprint is tiny.

The obvious methds of lowering birth rates are being enacted (education, family planning etc.), but even if we drove this further, and caused more of the problems associated with a declining population, we would still see a world population figure going up, and its not just birth rate, but also the age at which people die that affects the population number, so as a country develops, people become healthier, they live longer, meaning that even if a birth rate goes down, the population can still increase.

The population is set to level off at about 10billion (give or take), but this is lower than previously thought.

This is a level that we can cope with as long as we work out how to enact sustainable economic policies. Ie. green growth - which we aren't close to doing. The idea that we won't cope with that population once developed, assumes our technology/system are static in ability. It isn't, sa we have always improved how efficient we produce food etc.

I highly recommend Gapminder for anyone who feels pessimistic about population.
Population talk here:
Further videos here:

Those reports are nice 'feel good' articles (I've not read those, but ones which take the same approach) -- they are based too largely on speculation and the assumption that our rate of technological development continues to grow.

To be honest, my concern isn't with carbon footprints or the climate, but access to raw resources -- resources we're going to continue to need for a long while. The more people there are, the greater the pressure is on governments to seek access to water, oil, gas, timber, arable farmland, etc. The more people there are, the less time we have to think of ways of generating electricity or producing food more efficiently.

Maybe I'm just a very pessimistic person, but I just don't think we'll change our mindsets in time.
 
Those reports are nice 'feel good' articles (I've not read those, but ones which take the same approach) -- they are based too largely on speculation and the assumption that our rate of technological development continues to grow.

To be honest, my concern isn't with carbon footprints or the climate, but access to raw resources -- resources we're going to continue to need for a long while. The more people there are, the greater the pressure is on governments to seek access to water, oil, gas, timber, arable farmland, etc. The more people there are, the less time we have to think of ways of generating electricity or producing food more efficiently.

Maybe I'm just a very pessimistic person, but I just don't think we'll change our mindsets in time.
They aren't feel good reports, they are based on history, and looking at what the world is doing today. The late great Hans Rosling is behind Gap Minder, and he has a background of working in poorer countries as a doctor, and later did a lot of research in this subject (hence the website and many books and videos). I also recommend his book Factfullness, but please do explore the links above.

We see a lot of negativity in the news, but we don't see good news often. Such things often happen slowly, and so don't get reported. Its not all good news of course.

Resources, as I've said, will be used more efficiently in the future.

There is plently to be pessimistic about - we're not going to meet our 1.5C target, which has huge implications. But population is not an issue we should worry about on a global scale unless we suddenly stop lowering the birth rate, which currently is unlikely.
1668092775680.png
 
Last edited:
Thought you'd hold out and not get the jab but if you've got principals suppose they get the better of you in the end.
Principals (sic) usually do get the better of you, in the end.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top