GrowthBusters: World Population Day

8 Comments on "GrowthBusters: World Population Day"

DMyers on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 3:08 am 



This whole population problem is a can of worms. Clearly, the problem to libertarians is who has the final say. Do we have a government dictating population parameters? If that were the case we would have government shills demanding a one child mandate while they themselves have six or seven. Indeed, that is what we have. I concede that we have a population problem, but the solution is not to grant the power of euthanasia to an arrogant upper class of green-ass liberals.

BillT on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 3:45 am 



Mother Nature does not recognize governments or financial systems or even species. She is preparing to wipe the human species from the earth in a huge tsunami of natural causes. Famine, pestilence, and yes, war. War is a means to eradicate those species that over extend their resources. It happens in the animal, insect and every other area of nature. When she is finished, there will be a lot fewer of us, maybe numbering in the lower six digits.

Dave Gardner on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 4:05 am 



Glad to see this starting some conversations. Couples the world over can make voluntary, informed, responsible decisions to limit the size of their family. We just need to get the information out there and ignore the growth profiteers trying to convince us to grow their market. No euthanasia required and we don’t have to wait for nature to do this less elegantly.

Dave Gardner
Director of the documentary
GrowthBusters: Hooked on Growth

SilentRunning on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 5:01 am 



Phase out the tax breaks for kids in the developed world – you get a tax credit for 1st child, nothing for 2nd child, removal of tax credit when you have the 3rd child and EXTRA TAXES for anything over 3.

That would encourage families to have 2 or fewer children.

Why should the government promote child rearing with tax policy on an overpopulated planet?

Kenz300 on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 1:01 pm 



Every country needs to develop a plan to balance its population with resources, food, water, energy and jobs. Those that do not will be exporting their populations. Access to family planning services needs to be available to all that want it.

cam on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 5:17 pm 



Of course there is a simple answer to why governments won’t move to reduce population while it can still be done humanely. Our current economic system is entirely dependent on continuous and eternal growth without which it will collapse. More people, more consumers more laborers etc.

Looks bad either way!!

DC on Sat, 7th Jul 2012 10:44 pm 



In ancient times, more population meant more soldiers, more farm workers, and only as an afterthought, potentially more taxpayers. In modern times, more population simply means more taxpayers and more consumers, and as added bonus, depress wages for skilled and semi-skilled labour, and totally destroy it for un-skilled labour at the bottom, which global corporations just love. We dont really need more labourers these days, as business now spends most of its spare time trying to find ways to reduce the labour force, or replace them with machines where possible. Everywhere you look, humans have filled even marginal places to live, and outstripped the ability of even producing areas to sustain them. I live in a watch rich fertile valley atm, filled with 150,000+ consumers. Without Wall-mart, probably 85% or more of them would starve or be forced to move elsewhere if it all came to an end.

DMyers on Sun, 8th Jul 2012 12:29 am 



Mr. Gardner has made a good point. There is an active effort to encourage procreation for its market benefits. Corporate America will forever be seeking a return to that mother of all marketing mother lodes, the baby boom.

It’s interesting to see how this has played out. Mr. Gardner is, to some extent, preaching to the choir. The traditional U.S. population has stabilized and may even be regressing. The Hispanic population, however, is exploding. This is making up, so to speak, for the regression in the traditional camp, i.e. white middle class.

I’m not speaking against Hispanic people in any way. I love Hispanic people. They are a very family oriented culture. If one family member is going to the dentist, they’re all going to the dentist with him. I would also say that Hispanic women are rapidly becoming “Americanized” and that this is going to lead to smaller families among the Hispanic communities.

What I am saying is look how this has worked. Apparently one sign of a rising civilization is a shrinking birth rate. And so we are seeing in the U.S. and Europe. However, in the U.S. we have supplemented the declining birth rate by allowing eleven-odd million persons from Latin America to breach our border and beef up the inner population. On top of that, this group, under all the circumstances, is quite prolific, thereby multiplying the population benefits in exponential fashion.

The result of this situation is that the U.S. has been able to avoid a certain economic pain that will come from its “shrinking” population as birth rates fall. We have kicked the can down the road on this issue by allowing a sort of artificial population transfusion.