[emersonbiggins]

A milestone indeed.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some time this month, the number of Americans will surpass 300 million, a milestone that raises environmental impact questions for the only major industrial nation whose population is increasing substantially.

The U.S. Census Bureau predicts the 300 million mark will be reached in mid-October, 39 years after U.S. population topped 200 million and 91 years after it exceeded 100 million.

This will make the United States No. 3 in population in the world, after China and India.

Most of the growth is taking place in the South and West, according to the Census Bureau. From 2004 to 2005, U.S. population had a natural increase -- births minus deaths -- of 1.7 million and international migration of 1 million.
(more at Reuters)

[NEOPO]

Thats just great...
Someone told me that we pased it today but I wonder if thats just this story ala grapevine.

Essentially this means that life in america is worth just alittle bit less then it was yesterday, little less room to wiggle, less resources, more momentum toward the wall with the words written upon it "INEVITABILITY" and yet still a surplus of stupid

Thats it - i am starting a company named stupid that goes around doing smart things yet people wont realize it so they will say thats stupid thus free advertising!!!

[ohanian]

Can someone explain to me how in a country of 300 million people, the person performing the most important job in the country is an idiot.

[NEOPO]

because thats his character man - all the worlds a stage;-)
You dont actually understand peak oil yet want to believe that everything is a mistake do you?

9/11 = iraq + afghanistan.
In a resource war little else matters.
Political fall out etc etc nothing matters as long as diebold receives its payment or is otherwise controlled.

oops I jumped way ahead didnt I?

[seldom_seen]

We had a chance too, until congress decided to bust open the borders and start importing overpopulation from other countries.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he green section of the graphic is the future that millions of Americans began to create in the early 1970s when they decided -- on average -- to have families at replacement size (about two children per family).

But the red shows the extra population Congress added through above-replacement-level immigration.

http://www.numbersusa.com/overpopulatio ... uture.html

[emersonbiggins]

Lots of sucklings on the government teat, I see...

[Loki]

Does this include the 10-20 million illegal aliens currently residing in the US?

[IslandCrow]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ohanian', 'C')an someone explain to me how in a country of 300 million people, the person performing the most important job in the country is an idiot.

[lateralus]

Wow, Americans are packed in like sardines. You have approx. 10 times the population of Canada in a smaller area of land....my math is fuzzy but that roughly equals...hmmm...*scratches head*.....stress....

[Loki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IslandCrow', '
')
Regarding the population level: Does anybody have a guess as to what a sustainable level of population in the States might be post PO? Many people use the world wide figure of 2 billion. In 1950 the world population was about 2,5 billion, and at that time the population of the States was 152 million. Yet the States has a low population density compared to many European countries.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lateralus', 'Y')ou have approx. 10 times the population of Canada in a smaller area of land.

[Merlin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IslandCrow', 'R')egarding the population level: Does anybody have a guess as to what a sustainable level of population in the States might be post PO?

[IslandCrow]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', '
')Estimates of the Native population in present-day Canada and the US prior to 1492 range from 1 million to 20 million, with most scholars estimating in the 4-10 million range. These people lived relatively lightly on the land (compared to us at least). They were pretty much all small-scale agriculturists and/or hunter-gatherers. As far as I know, none of them drove Hummers.

[Loki]

I guess I should have also mentioned that just because the Native population was 4-10 million doesn't mean that it was sustainable. There just aren't any data on long term population trends in North America. Native people certainly starved on occasion, and there is some evidence of environmental degradation in some areas.

But overall, their way of life did seem to be compatible with the existence of a rich tapestry of plant and animal life--massive herds of buffalo, extensive stands of old-growth forests, clean air and water, tons of birds, huge salmon runs, etc., etc., etc. I define the term "sustainable" as including these environmental factors as well as the long-term viability of the human population.

I think one of the best ways of determining "carrying capacity" at a given standard of living is an ecological footprint analysis. It's not perfect, but it does give at least a rough idea of carrying capacity given specified parameters.

[TommyJefferson]

Population density of the continents:

People Per Square Mile

Australia - 6.4
North America - 32
Africa - 65
South America - 73
United States - 76
Europe - 134
Asia - 203

The population density of the planet (including all land area) is about 105 people per square mile. If Antarctica is eliminated (since it has zero population density), the world population density rises only to 115 people per square mile.

[Tyler_JC]

My county has a population density of 715 people per square mile!

My town's population density is a mere 468 people per square mile.

But this area is somewhat more habitable than say, the Sahara Desert or Lake Michigan.

[emersonbiggins]

300,000,000 people means there's only 7.54 acres of land area per person. No more 40 acres and a mule for your common family of four - more like 30.

[azreal60]

That graph posted ealier raised some questions. The red was labled differently than the poster indicated. The red was total us Population, the green was immigration. Now, I somehow doubt there is immigration even at the level of half the US population. I think the scale there was off by a 0 or two. LOL

Seriously though, I love how people love blaming it on immigration when the average family around here is 3 children. And those three have three each, and so on and so forth. Having food makes us want to breed, biological fact. Less food, less breeding.

Read some daniel quinn. I like the story of B for population growth theories.

[Loki]

azreal60, the red is immigrants and their descendants. Immigrants, both legal and illegal, have more kids than native-born Americans. If we had cut off immigration in 1970, when the graph begins, presumably our population would be around 245 million rather than 300 million. I say presumably because I haven't seen their data.

I'm an unrepentant, unapologetic treehugger. I think turning a blind eye to over-immigration is by FAR the biggest mistake the environmental movement is making. We can sue the bastards to our heart's delight but it's not going to matter one whit if our population continues to grow at the rate it's growing. But the enviro mvt is too afraid of being labeled racist--and too wedded to liberal politics--to actually tackle the biggest environmental problem facing our country.

[TommyJefferson]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', 'B')ut the enviro mvt is too afraid of being labeled racist--and too wedded to liberal politics--to actually tackle the biggest environmental problem facing our country.