But that population exceeds sustainable carrying capacity = still on course for doom.
Steady as she goes...
Systemic Collapse: The Basics
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
Steady as she goes...
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
No, the total population (ie. the population including those countries with low consumption) is above carrying capacity. So the solution isn't forced euthenasia (just come out and say it eh?) but redistribution of wealth. Then their population growth with slow and reverse, just like everyone elses has - and idris has just pointed out that this process has already begun in some parts of the developing world.
toblerone3
Grrrrr
What's on the Y axis of that graph?
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
I agree, but implying that Dr Jon (and other "doomers") secretly want to murder half the world's population is as offensive as it is ludicrous, IMO.
My interpretation of their position, fwiw, is this:
We're fucked
These are the things we can do to un-fuck ourselves
They're not enough
We're still fucked
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
I'm assuming it's the level of technological development, or rather the amount of technology available for human use. Quite how you quantify that is beyond me.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Well I'm struggling to figure out what he actually does want - if overpopulation is the problem then the population must be reduced - how else do we go about doing it? Especially as he ascribes first cause to overpopulation, so addressing other issues can't be the solution. Maybe it's sterilisation instead?
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Well if that's the case I apologise - though tbh he doesn't help himself by banging on about Malthus all the time.
Still can't understand it though - if it's true and we're fucked whatever we do why go on about it? Might as well just get on with it. The peak oil thread (or at least the parts of it I've had time to read) seems a lot less hysterical than what Falcon and DrJon come out with - even the more "doomy" types on there seem to concede that we don't know exactly what will happen and there are people trying to work out ways this could be addressed. (Kudos to Bernie Gunther for his contribution, some excellent and informative posts)
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Well, from a selfish point of view, if you can see the calamity coming, you can try and make it as painless as possible for yourself and your family. Humanity isn't going to annihilate itself, just make things very hard, so you may as well use the last of the good times to prepare for the bad.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Not if you argue, as DrJon does, that those who don't survive will be the lucky ones.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Well that position is too pessimistic even for me
The basic good things in life can be had with very little overhead. Sitting round the campfire telling stories and eating the day's kill (for a complete collapse of civilization example) is not a terrible chore.
I suppose the transition period between now and this sort of future could be "a fate worse than death" if you lived in certain places
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
It's high time somebody good did a remake of Soylent Green. Verhoeven?
Next 3-5 years will be key. Unless all the debt gets written then there's going to be a lot of hard graft especially in the "Western" service based countries that don't produce products. The US debt is still skyrocketing and that has knock on effects for everyone.
Anyone checked inflation on supermarket prices recently?
Anyone checked inflation on supermarket prices recently?
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Well that position is too pessimistic even for me
The basic good things in life can be had with very little overhead. Sitting round the campfire telling stories and eating the day's kill (for a complete collapse of civilization example) is not a terrible chore.
I suppose the transition period between now and this sort of future could be "a fate worse than death" if you lived in certain places
Don't get me wrong, I find peak oil fucking terrifying. But since 1) there ain't much I can do about it, and I live pretty much hand to mouth already so I don't really have any opportunity for hoarding tins of beans and condensed milk, and 2) any actual solution would, IMO, have to be along similar, egalitarian lines to those I advocate anyway, I'm not going to get too hung up on it.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
You've not bothered to read a single word of this thread have you?
Wait til there's no beer or sex or chips 'n' gravy...Well that position is too pessimistic even for me
free spirit
more tea vicar?
one thing I've never seen Dr Jon say anything about though is what standard of living this 1 billion people are supposed to have.
Just as an example, the per capita ecological footprint of the US is around 19 times higher than Bangladesh, so 19 times more people could live on the same amount of the world's resources at Nigerian levels as at US levels of consumption.
Which nicely demonstrates why anyone bandying around such figures without qualifying them in this way are spouting scaremongering rubbish, and probably doesn't really understand the problem or it's potential solutions properly.
If they want to say something along the lines of...
... then that'd be a hell of a lot different, and would clearly demonstrate the major point of the issue, which is that consumption levels are every bit as important as population.
* figures are purely illustrative.
Wait til there's no beer or sex or chips 'n' gravy...
There will always be sex.
albionism
A successful virus clinging to a speck of mud.
and a cornetto
albionism
A successful virus clinging to a speck of mud.
D'oh, beat me to it.
Lemon Eddy
Disliked by dwyer
From the OP's link:
"The British Petroleum and United Nations data confirmed that world per capita energy-use had peaked in about 1978 and subsequently had declined"
In 1978, per capita energy use was equivalent to 1479 kg of oil. By 2008 this had risen to 1839 kg of oil (source)
I reckon that if you want to start a good "we're all fucked" theory, you need to get the basics right at least.
"The British Petroleum and United Nations data confirmed that world per capita energy-use had peaked in about 1978 and subsequently had declined"
In 1978, per capita energy use was equivalent to 1479 kg of oil. By 2008 this had risen to 1839 kg of oil (source)
I reckon that if you want to start a good "we're all fucked" theory, you need to get the basics right at least.
When I was a young bright eyed Trot ,in the 70's, always trying to recruit the most unlikely people to the cause, one particularly indolent hippy type pub associate we kept bothering to get involved insisted I sit down one day , whilst he READ ME, his big magnus opus - a LONG essay PROVING that the world was DOOMED by a combination of :
a) Global warming OR a new ice age
and
b) the inevitable collapse of civilisation due to overpopulation.
Having proved, at least to himself , that doing anything to change the existing conditions of society, let him off any activity "hook" ,we stopped bothering him, and HE eventually put on a suit and became an insurance salesman.
It's GREAT, "Doomster" belief isn't it, for overwhelmingly passive people, often with profoundly reactionery belief systems, faced by a profound social crisis. NOT very useful for anybody else though.
a) Global warming OR a new ice age
and
b) the inevitable collapse of civilisation due to overpopulation.
Having proved, at least to himself , that doing anything to change the existing conditions of society, let him off any activity "hook" ,we stopped bothering him, and HE eventually put on a suit and became an insurance salesman.
It's GREAT, "Doomster" belief isn't it, for overwhelmingly passive people, often with profoundly reactionery belief systems, faced by a profound social crisis. NOT very useful for anybody else though.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yep. In a few decades' time, we may conceivably reach a situation where the problem is population decline.
There is a well-established pattern with urbanisation whereby population continues to grow quickly for a time, then growth plummets really fairly sharply down to around replacement levels. This has happened with every experience of urbanisation across the world that we have records for. And the world is urbanising very rapidly. Basically, in a city, children are expensive and not particularly economically useful. People in cities have kids mostly out of biological urge, rather than for their economic value - and this change in self-interest is what sees birth rates plummet.
love detective
there's no love too small
seriously? fair enough the rate of growth could decline, but is it realistically the case that within a few decades absolute population will be declining rather than rising (serious question like)
Is this the start of Dr Jon's great clear out?
Is this the start of Dr Jon's great clear out?
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Sounds like one of those good problems!
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Could well be, yes. Birthrates in cities have a tendency to drop below replacement level. We're seeing it in quite a few places across the world now. Not just Europe, but East Asia too - anywhere that is heavily urbanised.
Similar threads
