Skip to main content

More on overpopulation

By
Here's some more evidence from Yglesias for the thesis that overpopulation is not a critical environmental issue:
...the most important point about global population growth is the point David Brooks makes today—it's slowing down almost everywhere and the global trend is clearly toward birthrates that are below the replacement level. Because of "demographic momentum" and rising life expectency, relatively few countries are poised for falling population in the short-term but Russia is already there, Japan will be soon, Spain and Italy will follow, and while China is difficult to predict they're looking at the sharpest cliff.
You hear a lot that if everyone lived like Americans then we would need five Earths' worth of resources to support everyone. That's true, but the converse is that if everyone lived like Ethiopians we could comfortably support 10 billion people or more. You might respond that would eat up all the available land, but if everyone in the United States lived in a city with Brooklyn's density, we could fit everyone into New Hampshire.

Again, the most critical environment issue is climate change, and it isn't caused by overpopulation. It is caused by inefficiency and poor resource allocation.
Labels:

Comments

  1. AnonymousMarch 14, 2012 at 12:14 PM

    I agree that the current population isn't the problem that it's made out to be. All the world's major problems are caused by the cartels that create debt money out of nothing and then foist the yoke of taxation on the peoples to repay these created debts.

    Taxation drives overproduction and consumption artificially. If people were truly free, meaning if they owned themselves and the fruits of their labor, and were not forced at gunpoint to pay taxes; they would produce little more than needed to survive. Artificial consumption would drop off radically.

    The ancient families that have run the world for thousands of years with their debts schemes are the root problem of the majority of the world's ills.

    Create debt free money and free humanity of involuntary taxation you heal the planet. Who would chip in for wars etc.?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Setswana Grammar Manual

By
One of my few successes during my service here was formatting the Peace Corps South Africa grammar manual for Setswana, written mostly by Art Chambers, an SA16 volunteer.  For anyone wanting to learn Setswana, I reckon it's a pretty good primer, so I present it for free here .  If you think it sucks and you want to make changes, or you'd like to take a look at the raw TeX file, you can find it here .
6 comments
Read more

On Refusing to Vote for Bloomberg

By
Billionaire Mike Bloomberg is attempting to buy the Democratic nomination. With something like $400 million in personal spending so far, that much is clear — and it appears to be working at least somewhat well, as he is nearing second place in national polls. I would guess that he will quickly into diminishing returns, but on the other hand spending on this level is totally unprecedented. At this burn rate he could easily spend more than the entire 2016 presidential election cost both parties before the primary is over. I published a piece today outlining why I would not vote for Bloomberg against Trump (I would vote for Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, or Biden), even though I live in a swing state. This got a lot of "vote blue no matter who" people riled up . They scolded me and demanded that I pre-commit to voting for Bloomberg should he win the nomination. The argument as I understand it is to try to make it as likely as possible that whatever Democrat wins t...
4 comments
Read more

Russiagate and the Left, Round II

By
Corey Robin has responded to my article arguing that the left should take the Trump-Russia story more seriously . I do appreciate that he considers me an ally, and I feel the same towards him. However I am not convinced. The points I want to make are somewhat disconnected, so I will just take them one at a time. What should be done? Robin complains that I don't give much attention to the question of how we should respond to Russian electoral espionage. As an initial matter, the question of whether a problem is an important one is logically distinct from what the response should be. There is a sizable vein of skepticism about Russiagate on the left, and the argument of the post was that skepticism was misplaced. Solutions can be worked out later. This point is rather similar to the centrist argument that you can't talk about Medicare for All unless you've got a fully costed-out bill detailing all the necessary taxes and regulation. However, I have advanced some pol...
4 comments
Read more