Early Retirement Extreme Forums

I think this forum deserves a note that yesterday, 15 November 2022, was the day the UN estimated the global population had crossed eight billion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Eight_Billion

I am going to try to escape the doom and gloom some (and me on occasion) associate with the fact that there are so many human bodies and we might run out of food. In this effort I will order from the library 'Factfulness' and 'How I learned to Understand the World' by Hans Rosling.

For what it’s worth, I think there are also projections that population will begin to decline by the end of the century, happening sooner in places of greater economic development and consumption. So max out around 10B? I’m actually more curious what the world looks like if/when we hit that point of steady state or population decline. Unfortunately, will probably not be around to see it. Japan sort of gives us a glimpse, but they have also been buoyed by importing cheap goods and relying on growth from other parts of Asia.

bostonimproper wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 9:29 am

I’m actually more curious what the world looks like if/when we hit that point of steady state or population decline. Unfortunately, will probably not be around to see it.

Be careful what you wish for. There are several reasons for population decline and not all are benign.

guitarplayer wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 3:31 am

I think this forum deserves a note that yesterday, 15 November 2022, was the day the UN estimated the global population had crossed eight billion.

Demographics is a force of nature. I remember knowing the each future +1B year since twenty years back. It's like clockwork.
(In my younger days I was volunteering for an "overpopulation" non-profit. I have fun hobbies.)

Back then, humans added 120M (two UKs) each year. It's currently "down" to adding 80M (one Germany) each year. The 9 billion mark will be in 2036 or so.

I like https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ to see the trickle rate.
However, my favorite is this map https://pudding.cool/2018/10/city_3d/

I haven’t kept up on the food distribution problem. I think there are groups already running out of food. Oddly the people with the most food also have the biggest carbon footprints. The fast growing groups may not be such a big burden on the planet. For now.

On that same note COVID19 hurt a lot of third world people in fast growing populations. They didn’t have the systems to rally to their defense. It makes me wonder if pestilence could actually limit the worst carbon contributors on the planet who happen to be defending themselves well relative to third world populations.

I’m going to think about it over some hot cocoa. I recall my fellow citizens consume 1/2 of the world cocoa production. Never mind, I don’t have time I need to shop for thanksgiving dinner.

I know it’s dark. Maybe I should reference Pareto analysis from the ERE book instead.

Thanks to the Green Revolution and globalization, the poorest of the poor are much less likely to be dying from starvation than when I was an 8 year old collecting coins in my Girl's Friendly Society charity box and global population was only 4 billion. Unfortunately, these are innovations like unto getting more fish from the lake by using sonar and lifting restrictions on fishing lisences; so crash could be much harder when it comes. Dunno.

Have they identified the actual baby yet ? S/he should be given a special award.

The earth's population has increased almost exactly by 75% since I was born. Clever people could work out my age from that information.

The problem is that economic development leads to rapid reduction in family size, as the economic cost vs benefits of large vs small families inverses. Which means the environmental benefit of smaller offspring is probably more than nullified by the economic impact.

The obvious solution is just to average 2 children per women to maintain replacement levels, or maybe push for an average of say 1.9 to gradually deflate the peak to more manageable levels. Which is roughly where northern Europe is at the moment, although immigration results in greater net increase.

chenda wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 12:14 pm

Have they identified the actual baby yet ? S/he should be given a special award.

It's impossible. There are some 4 babies being added for every second around the clock. So for milestones, it's just some random baby being designated for PR purposes.

jacob wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 12:36 pm

It's impossible. There are some 4 babies being added for every second around the clock. So for milestones, it's just some random baby being designated for PR purposes.

Yes that's what I mean, I think it's nice thing to do even if it's obviously a random baby.

jacob wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 10:19 am

However, my favorite is this map https://pudding.cool/2018/10/city_3d/

Thanks! I was just thinking about something like this the other day when I was reading about the rapid growth of Glasgow at the turn of the XIX century.

ETA: Today I was chatting with a colleague who turns out to be from Hong Kong. Apart from asking him his predictions about Chinese economy and the future of feeding its huge population, also asked him about compare and contrast of Hong Kong vs Scotland. The dramatically different feel of the population density was the first thing he had mentioned.

jacob wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 10:19 am

It's like clockwork.

Clock making, of course! <light bulb moment>

Regions where population decline leads to economic decline will also look somewhat different from regions where economic decline leads to population decline, such as in the Rust Belt. So much human made stuff just falling into disrepair. I think 3000 houses are scheduled for demolition in the next year or two near me, all of them picked clean of metal by human scavengers.

7Wannabe5 wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 3:23 pm

Regions where population decline leads to economic decline will also look somewhat different from regions where economic decline leads to population decline, such as in the Rust Belt. So much human made stuff just falling into disrepair. I think 3000 houses are scheduled for demolition in the next year or two near me, all of them picked clean of metal by human scavengers.

I saw an interesting documentary about Detroit. One of the most remarkable things it highlighted was how quickly the 'white flight' phenomena happened. Whole streets of mansions which had been occupied by lawyers and auto-executives were abandoned seemingly overnight and left to rot. Though it also highlighted a lot of positive things happening, urban agriculture on abandoned lots and it's growing cultural industries.

In developed countries food is a solved problem. The problem is we eat (and produce, and throw away) too much.

8 billionth person.
https://news.yahoo.com/baby-girl-born-m ... 43783.html

Watch "Soylent Green" for overpopulation hysteria. Population Bomb was the Climate Change of the 50's and 60's.

unemployable wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 16, 2022 8:57 pm

In developed countries food is a solved problem. The problem is we eat (and produce, and throw away) too much.

Only in the sense that if there are ever food shortages, we can just outbid people in poorer countries. Of course you can't outbid them for food that isn't there or eat fiat currency, so that only works to a point. I don't think of food as something that magically appears on a grocery store shelf, just like I don't think of water as something that magically appears when I turn on the tap, although that is the perspective of most humans in developed countries.

I would caution against thinking of food as a solved problem because that leaves you most vulnerable to disruptions. How many Europeans thought of winter heating as a solved problem? Prior to COVID, how many people around the world thought of pestilence as a solved problem? It was until it wasn't.

The problem is really we have too many people living at too high a standard of living, so at some point something will give (well really it's already giving e.g. climate change, resource wars, etc). I think we had a thread about the trilemma of large population, high standard of living, and freedom. Pick any 2. Or maybe the techno-optimism gods will save us.

white belt wrote:Or maybe the techno-optimism gods will save us.

I think the doomer/optimist schism has to be somewhat transcended. For instance, consider the fact that ERE itself is an innovation towards limiting growth.

Not my invention but a doomer could be a sooner optimist.

There is still massive resistance from suggesting to people to consider reducing ones own consumption. I've heard the suggestion IRL that climate change is code word for "social engineering." Some weird propaganda or denialism or something else - and I can only facepalm realize further conversation was probably useless at this point.

But we will surely reach our global carrying capacity at this rate. Perhaps that limit is already reached in some places - the destruction is not evenly distributed after-all.

I've wondered in my lifetime will a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom house on Zillow appear listed for sale on Antarctica .

Lots of doom in this post but I think there are some positive developments in technology and movements emerging in human culture to suggest that things have a chance of turning around or just deflating. We're rather adaptable as a species.

@Lemur They are probably looking at the problem from the macro level rather than micro. A solution to climate change that requires reducing consumption will target the wealthy (because they are the problem). Reducing their consumption is going to look awfully like socialism.