Over the past 100 years we went from 2 billion to 8 billion in world population.

[fightforfreedom]

That is not sustainable. The future of mankind is going to be very dystopian. Much worse than it is now. In a very short period of time, look what the internet has done to our lives, to the world. We are living through the early stages of a dystopian world. Climate change will continue. Privacy will become extinct. Our technology will become more advanced, more uncontrollable. Weapons of war will become more advanced. All of this is not hard to predict.

As the climate changes millions of people will be forced to migrate. This will put great pressure on governments and economies around the world. In my opinion, we cannot stop climate change with out of control population growth. It is predicted by the United Nations population growth will begin to slow down. Lets hope they are right. But we will still add a billion people every 10 to 20 years in the near future.

I am glad I was born when I was born. I can't even imagine what the world will be like a hundred years from now.

On a positive note. I am sure many amazing, good things will happen in the future. They will just take place in a very dystopian world.

[peppertree]

1. And the most troubling problem going forward?

Water.

[David__77]

2. The solution is economic growth for the whole world.

Technology transfer to the developing countries. Cooperation to develop the infrastructure and productive capacity internationally.

[fightforfreedom]

5. The problem is we can't control our technology now.

That will continue to get worse. We need more technology to control our technology. It is a vicious cycle that is moving at lighting speed.

[NickB79]

8. The US consumes more natural resources per capita than anyone

Economic growth by itself is not a solution. It DOES reduce birthrates, as women become more empowered to have fewer children, but those children go on to become heavy consumers in a capitalist society.

Just running in place, environmentally, if not falling backwards.

The only solution would be extremely targeted economic growth in developing nations, and targeted degrowth in developed nations. But since capitalism relies on an ever-growing economy, we have absolutely no clue how to make that happen on a global scale.

[David__77]

12. The conflation of capitalism with economic growth is interesting.

The broad majority of people want “growth,” meaning more freedom to consume goods and services and enjoy leisure. If they perceive the Republican Party is the party of growth, that party will win.

[Kaleva]

3. Climate change will balance out the population

By the time enacted population control measures begin taking effect, the worst of climate change will have arrived or will be on the horizon .

We should also be aware that some green house gases can remain in the atmosphere for hundreds of years so even if population reduction programs could be implemented, generations may pass before the climate returns to a preindustrial condition

[Irish_Dem]

6. Yes climate change and income inequality will balance out the population.

Perhaps a few more serious global pandemics will assist as well.

The US is doing its part with gun violence and the lack of affordable health care.

[ananda]

4. Absolutely right.

8 billion is WAY too many!

[hunter]

7. Short explanation: We learned how to eat fossil fuels.

Unfortunately we never figured out what to do with fossil fuel waste. We just dump it anywhere and everywhere.

That will probably destroy our civilization.

[maxsolomon]

10. that, and vaccines.

so many more children survive now.

[keithbvadu2]

9. Looking back in time (Matrix)

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. I'm not sure what your point about the internet is

It's what you and I are using to communicate. Is that what you see as dystopian?

Population growth is already slowing, by the way - both in proportional terms ("The world population growth rate declined from around 2% per year 50 years ago to under 1.0% per year" ) and in absolute terms - it peaked at an extra 92 million people per year in 1990, and is now about 68 million.

[fightforfreedom]

14. You don't see the problems with the internet?

All of our identities have been stolen. The internet was a major factor Trump was elected. The internet has allowed criminals, terrorists, extremists to organize like never before. The internet has radicalized millions of people. A foreign country if they wanted to could shut down our electric grid.

We are at the mercy of the internet.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. The internet has given us electronic communication

Email, modern business, and it allows private individuals to saying something that anyone in the world can read - and respond to.

My identity has never been stolen.

The internet was a major factor in the election of Obama.

The internet has allowed protestors across the world to organize like never before.

The internet has educated, informed and entertained billions of people.

You fear a country could shut down your grid. There's no evidence of that, though. Ukraine's grid is the one at risk - from high explosive, not the internet.

We are talking to each other thanks to the internet. No internet, no DU.

[Kaleva]

17. The internet is an Invaluable source for info on adapting to climate change

[rownesheck]

13. I have three children.

I don't want grandchildren. Their future will be a fudging nightmare.

[newdayneeded]

15. Mother earth,

will shed off a billion or 2 of us stink bugs when she's ready. It will be absolute when it happens.

[roamer65]

19. For everyone to have a European standard of living, we have to lose 6 billion.

That should give everyone a good idea of the coming pressure we are placing on our planet.

[Zeitghost]

18. Technology and inovation

have always been the answer.

People have been predicting the end of the world and the human race since the dawn of civilization. Every one has been wrong and I don't see any reason that pattern will stop now. We have bright days ahead.

[EX500rider]

20. I'm with you

Necessity has always been the mother of invention

[WarGamer]

21. Depending on whose projections you believe...

We could double from today to 2100.

16 Billion.

[Celerity]

24. The 16 billion mark by 2100 is very likely not credible, it is an extreme outlier.

2 examples that show why:

World population to reach 8 billion this year, as growth rate slows

The latest UN projections suggest that the world’s population could grow to around 8.5 billion in 2030 and 9.7 billion in 2050, before reaching a peak of around 10.4 billion people during the 2080s. The population is expected to remain at that level until 2100.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/07/1122272

Slowest growth rate since 1950s

However, the annual World Population Prospect report, released on Monday to coincide with World Population Day, also notes that the global population is growing at its slowest rate since 1950, having fallen to less that one per cent in 2020. Fertility, the report declares, has fallen markedly in recent decades for many countries: today, two-thirds of the global population lives in a country or area where lifetime fertility is below 2.1 births per woman, roughly the level required for zero growth in the long run, for a population with low mortality. In 61 countries or areas, the population is expected to decrease by at least one per cent over the next three decades, as a result of sustained low levels of fertility and, in some cases, elevated rates of emigration.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an effect on population change: global life expectancy at birth fell to 71 years in 2021 (down from 72.9 in 2019) and, in some countries, successive waves of the pandemic may have produced short-term reductions in numbers of pregnancies and births. “Further actions by Governments aimed at reducing fertility would have little impact on the pace of population growth between now and mid-century, because of the youthful age structure of today’s global population,” said John Wilmoth, Director of the Population Division of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).

“Nevertheless, the cumulative effect of lower fertility, if maintained over several decades, could be a more substantial deceleration of global population growth in the second half of the century”.

Growth concentrated in eight countries

More than half of the projected increase in the global population up to 2050 will be concentrated in eight countries: the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines and the United Republic of Tanzania. Countries of sub-Saharan Africa are expected to contribute more than half of the increase anticipated through 2050. Liu Zhenmin, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, warned that rapid population growth makes eradicating poverty, combatting hunger and malnutrition, and increasing the coverage of health and education systems more difficult.

snip

and another that projects an even lower population total by 2100:

Researchers Say Earth Is Headed for "Jaw-Dropping" Population Decline

"It's extraordinary, we'll have to reorganize societies."

https://futurism.com/global-birth-rates-falling-precipitiously

People around the globe are having way fewer babies. By the year 2100, that might turn into a pretty big problem for humanity — rather than the relief one might expect. If they aren’t already, dozens of countries’ populations will be going into decline in this century, according to a new study published in the Lancet this week. 23 countries are expected to feel this effect intensify, with their populations dropping to half of what they are now by the year 2100.

The global population will peak at 9.7 billion around 2064, according to the new projection, and then drop off to 8.8 billion towards the end of the century. “That’s a pretty big thing; most of the world is transitioning into natural population decline,” Christopher Murray, co-author and researcher at the University of Washington, Seattle, told the BBC. “I think it’s incredibly hard to think this through and recognize how big a thing this is; it’s extraordinary, we’ll have to reorganize societies.”

The reality is that with more women receiving an education and entering the work force, combined with the wide availability of contraception, fertility rates are dropping, sometimes precipitously, around the world — a stark reversal of the baby boom following the Second World War. Countries including Spain, Portugal, and Thailand will have their populations more than halve by the end of the century — “jaw-dropping,” according to Murray.

But aren’t fewer humans better for a ravished world that’s rapidly being drained of its resources? The researchers suggest that there may be fewer babies being born, but any positive consequences for the environment would be offset by the challenges of a rapidly aging population. Much older populations “will create enormous social change,” Murray told the BBC. “Who pays tax in a massively aged world? Who pays for healthcare for the elderly? Who looks after the elderly? Will people still be able to retire from work?” “We need a soft landing,” he added.

snip


Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study

https://tinyurl.com/ybadb2q7

snip

Findings

The global TFR in the reference scenario was forecasted to be 1·66 (95% UI 1·33–2·08) in 2100. In the reference scenario, the global population was projected to peak in 2064 at 9·73 billion (8·84–10·9) people and decline to 8·79 billion (6·83–11·8) in 2100. The reference projections for the five largest countries in 2100 were India (1·09 billion [0·72–1·71], Nigeria (791 million [594–1056]), China (732 million [456–1499]), the USA (336 million [248–456]), and Pakistan (248 million [151–427]). Findings also suggest a shifting age structure in many parts of the world, with 2·37 billion (1·91–2·87) individuals older than 65 years and 1·70 billion (1·11–2·81) individuals younger than 20 years, forecasted globally in 2100. By 2050, 151 countries were forecasted to have a TFR lower than the replacement level (TFR

[Celerity]

22. These threads always dodge the huge, uncomfortable fact: the explosion in population was & is driven

by the third world, and especially Africa at the present time. Most advanced nations have native population fertility rates under (some dramatically so) replacement level (2.1 or so births per female equates to zero growth and zero decrease in population) or not much above. Globally, the fertility rate has been coming down for the last seven plus decades, and is now 2.428 births per female as of 2022.



So let's not kid ourselves. All these 'Omg, the earth is overpopulating and we need to take huge measures to stop it and (stated in many cases) reverse it' threads I have seen since I joined DU are people from rich, majority white nations (and I am sure many, if not most, of the posters are white themselves) demanding control of the reproduction systems (at micro and macro levels) of billions of PoC, especially black Africans.

Yep.

[JI7]

23. And they use fewer resources also

They aren't buying personal vehicles , flying, buying plastic junk. Most money made goes for basics.

Look at India and China where birth rates are decreasing but use of resources is going up.

So yes, the focus on population itself misses the real issues in dealing with climate change and resource scarcity.

[Celerity]

25. +1