The "World Model" published in 1972 predicted this behavior. There have been some articles suggesting the general trends are correct and the chit hits the fan in 2040. Is this be beginning of what we are in store for in 2040?
"In 2020, an analysis by Gaya Herrington (Sustainability and Dynamic System Analysis Lead at KPMG in the United States but in a personal capacity) was published in Yale's Journal of Industrial Ecology. The study assessed whether, given key data known in 2020 about factors important for the "Limits to Growth" report, the original report's conclusions are supported. In particular, the 2020 study examined updated quantitative information about ten factors, namely population, fertility rates, mortality rates, industrial output, food production, services, non-renewable resources, persistent pollution, human welfare, and ecological footprint, and concluded that the "Limits to Growth" prediction is essentially correct in that continued economic growth is unsustainable under a "business as usual" model."
Do you have enough Patriot food and water to last 25 years or past the point where half of us die off?
So despite your outwardly manifesting Trumpian ideology, I take it you are no longer willing to endorse mainstream "conservative" organizations like "The Club for Growth" and "Americans for Prosperity".
Dunno about the club for growth. Looked it up and see they are "Americans who share in the belief that prosperity and opportunity come from economic freedom."
It sounds good if you are concerned with the next 10-20 years. But, as Tiggity says below, at some point mother nature is going to get pissed off at humans.
The big question in my mind is how in the world can distinct countries and societies work together towards solving big global issues? It's never been done. TBH I'm not sure it can be done. Heck, we can't get our own country unified on any of the hard issues.
Developing countries are not going to stop developing because most of the rest of the world believes a closed system (earth) has limits.
It's a very interesting issue on many levels - technical, social, philosophical...maybe even religious.
What if, for example, China's leaders believe human civilization is doomed within the next few generations. Seriously, say the top CCP leaders have similar opinions as some of the extreme climate change folks or extreme environmentalists...Do they take measures to eradicate everyone except themselves? They are actually in a position to realistically create a viable plan to do that.
FWIW. Population control has been a hallmark of Leftist
May 19, 2022, 4:19 PM
ideology, particularly in the radical environmentalism space, for decades. Quite often it's cited as a justification for abortion.
Fortunately, the advances of capitalism and very promising free market solutions to environmental/food challenges from just the last decade, will allow humanity to thrive for centuries to come -- barring nuclear war (of course).
Life has been on Earth for almost 4 billion years. And it will be on Earth for several billion more. No species has ever eradicated life on Earth. Mother nature takes care of things, ALWAYS. The planet will destroy us LONG before we can destroy it. WW3, Yellowstone pops, meteor, plague, something will keep humans in check. Something always keeps a species in check. We will not run out of food. People will die if/when we reach peak food production. And then it all evens out. Or if the planet heats up another 15 degrees, humans will shrink and something else that does well in 130 degree heat will flourish.
What's funny is someone developed a simulator for the
May 19, 2022, 4:35 PM
rise in oceans. And even at "peak catastrophe" we're talking about losing a overall pretty negligible amount of coastline real estate way down the road. Plenty of time to adapt and buy now for ocean front property for your great, great, great, great grandkids.
I promise there will be less human beings on Earth
May 19, 2022, 4:57 PM
When our GGGGG grandkids are living, than there are now.
Mother nature rule #1....this crap doesn't last forever.
When our GGGGG grandparents were alive, there were FAR less humans alive. Average life expectancy was 30yo for most of the time humans have occupied this planet. It's kinda interesting too, many of our immune defenses for nasty diseases, like AIDS/covid/malaria/etc. evolved when humans only lived 30 or so years on average. As such, all these people 40+ years old, they are not capable of mounting strong immune defenses to many viruses, and in fact some of those defenses kill the older people, where the younger people survive (to reproduce). For most of our existence, humans have done everything they need to do, for propagating the species, by the time they're 30yo. You are raised by parents who had you at 16yo. By the time you are 16yo and can reproduce, that's what, 32 years for the parents. Bewm, you're not needed anymore, and there's your default life expectancy. Sickle cell is a good example. People with it have immunity to malaria, which is great. BUT, it also shortens your lifespan. Worth it though if you can live long enough to reproduce and raise your children.
People forget when Social Security started, the retirement age was actually PAST average life expectancy. Men died when they were 58yo on average, 7 years before retirement kicked in. Imagine Social Security not kicking in until you're 85yo......
Just more junk science that is economically illiterate
May 20, 2022, 8:58 AM
1) no way to know the graph of “resources”
2) when supply does actually drop steadily for a resource, it becomes profitable to develop ways to leverage another resource so technology shifts or advances