It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


World OverCrowded Simple Answer !

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:05 PM
The Earth is becoming highly populated, why dont the goverment in all countries make a law saying familys may only commit 2 children to their family. This could just slow down the population burst in the next few decades untill we are succesfully living in outer space

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:09 PM
Probably a pesky little thing we call "human rights"...

Of course, China isn't bothered by it, but then when half the world's population is in one nation, I suppose drastic measures were inevitable.

Here's a better idea, quit crippling the space programs by fighting unnecessary wars, and start terraforming the moon and Mars...

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:13 PM

Originally posted by Stevie
The Earth is becoming highly populated, why dont the goverment in all countries make a law saying familys may only commit 2 children to their family. This could just slow down the population burst in the next few decades untill we are succesfully living in outer space

Because who the F*%$ is going to let someone regulate if a child is born or not. You have engouh problem telling people that they can/cannot have an abortion. What if they had been trying for a girl and a boy and the second child you have is a boy too.. Then what ???? This will never happen ever again. Unless people get really really Tied up in something that they are not ready to handle.

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:30 PM
We have too many laws restricting our rights as it is, and here you are proposing another one.

Yea, there's a population problem, but restricting how many children a couple can have is ridiculous.

As someone else suggested, spend more money in the space program instead of wars. We should've been living on the moon by now, and getting ready to do the same on Mars.

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 08:13 PM
Until we have have large colonies that can hold atleast a billion, on mars the moon and in space, I think the govs. should pass a global law that says one child only.

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 01:49 AM
I have. And believe me, the restricting to 2 children per couple is relaly the ONLY solution. wait for the US to send us to mars? HAHA!! please, enough LAUGHING! The US is useless, they can't even realize it when they're breathing straight smog!

That's the only solution, but like it was said, you can't tell someone to only have 2 children. Because they'll have more JUST TO DEFY YOU! JUST TO HAVE HUMAN RIGHTS!

People are stupid, and ignorance lives. They'll hit the population max, and we'll be starving in the streets, having babies.

If you and I ran the world, we would deny benefits to a 3rd baby. raise taxes and whatever is needed. However, Bush runs the world. If only we didn't re-elect him...and now the draft is in place

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 02:18 AM
If this was made law then this board would be up in outroar about it.

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 02:42 AM

Originally posted by Gazrok
Here's a better idea, quit crippling the space programs by fighting unnecessary wars, and start terraforming the moon and Mars...

A lot of people seem to think that moving onward and outward into space will solve our problems here on earth. However, it seems to me that at best all it will do is stall our problems. If our population doubles every 30 years, and we are able to populate other planets tomorrow, that's 200 million people per year that we have to move to other planets just to maintain our current population here on earth. What are we going to to in 150 years (guessing) when the population of Mars has reached maximum capacity? We could move onto the next planet, but that still does not solve the problem on Mars or here on Earth, which will both be overpopulated, nor the core problem which is that there is just too many of us. Maybe my logic is flawed, but it seems that the only way to solve the overpopulation problem is to exhibit some self-control over our own reproduction. That way the elderly would die a natural death and we could slowly decrease the size of the population.

That said, I am completley against any type of government control on the number of kids people have. It is a personal choice, and not something the federal government should step in on. I have no idea how to implement a solution, but the alternative is not pretty.

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 02:54 AM
Who says that we're overpopulated? I mean, how many is too many? Who decides?

There is plenty of food and water in the world for everyone.

The disappearing resources and ailing earth has to do with greed and insensitivity. Not too many people.

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 05:53 AM
its realy funny over poplation? In this day its not how manny you have but how you use what you have.
take this sinero first moving all citys to underground(cant move it LA close it down.Then using yeast as the major food sorce (comes in stake flaver or anything else you want. Close down the surfice farms .Now your citys are very close to biosphers o you still need and want things from the out side but not nearly as much as we use now.
Using this meathed you could triple the planets poplation and still have lions tigers and bears o my. theres more room on the inside then there ever has been on the out. The surfice becomes a giant world park going back to the wild the only serfice citys being a few on the cost for imports.
Think this is nuts do you? it could be done.geothearmil energy just drill 2 miles down run a pipe and never ending energy .

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 05:55 AM
Not to many people? Come on we are heavily over populated, and its jsut going to get worse over the years. Moving to other planets is one solution but as stated above it would be hard to transport all these people to other planets, and this would come into play in a long time anyway. My theory on things is people underestimate mother nature, once we are really over populated a new disease will come out, say another black plauge will sweap the earth killing millions. Just like a bush fire, destrctuion is neccesary for new growth.

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 06:40 AM
Don't get too hasty here.

Sure, our population is rapidly growing and whether we like it or not the planet is going to be completely filled sooner or later, but there is space left for us to use.

There are countless areas that we could be using for either people or for food, for example deserts. Instead of flying to mars, why don't we fix these type of areas for more corruption to take place?

It would seem that people like living near water, I can't blame them, water is nice. There are so many major cities on the coast and not nearly as many inland. Whether the inland terrain is uninhabitable or not, it shouldn't be a problem when people are suggesting terraforming mars.

With restrictions comes less freedom. That is something that everyone should know and, well, be happy with already. Think about the laws that you abide to and the taxes that you pay every year. What about certain border restrictions? The point is we are already bound to certain limitations that keep us from being free.

I don't know if any of you have read 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell but I will use it as an example none the less. In this narrative, animals from 'Manor Farm' begin to see how wrongly they are being treated by farmer Jones. So they plan a revolution and take over the farm. At first they are doing great, but soon corruption and greed begin to take over and the farm slowly begins to deteriorate as they are not able to keep the farm up on their own and had to resort to other outside human resources to keep the farm running. In the end the ones that had once been fellow comrades are revealed to be cheating and manipulating them for power and money and become worse than Jones is. The whole time they are living a lie, a dream of freedom that is never realized.

The point is that true freedom can never happen. With the planet corrupted the way it is anyway. There will always be someone who wants to be above the rest and will rape the benefits from others by any means necessary. Eventually one of them will succeed in taking over once more and we will be back with the same restrictions as before.

As for more restrictions, I say bring them on. I see the increasing population much like global warming in that it's a problem that addressed but not attended to. Your freedom has been spared at the expense of the planet so why not give back a little. Share some of your freedom to make the planet a better place.

Have a good holiday...

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 06:50 AM
That is dangerous right-wing clap-trap!

The world is NOT OVERPOPULATED! The population is just not evenly spread.

If we all lived in the same density as Manhattan we could all squeeze into a place like Germany, leaving the rest of the planet monkey free.

I will just say it one more time to be sure, The world is not overpopulated, Kissinger wants you to think this ( so he has an excuse to bomb poor brown folks.

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 07:19 AM
Human rights....gets ya every time! I have often voiced my opinion that the men need to be sterilized in Africa....they keep having baby after baby that starve to death. You've all seen the commercials, "What's your biggest decision in the morning, the blue shirt or the red, what if you had to choose which child would eat and which one would die today".....well, "I" wouldn't have to make a choice, I'd stop having sex and getting pregnant....but they keep on having babies...the solution is to sterilize the men, a simple procedure that is not considered major surgery as it is for a woman...but, you can't do that due to human they keep having baby after baby and letting them starve to death slowly and painfully

posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 07:38 AM
I agree that mother nature will send out a new disease to control us. Aids is still on the rise so that should take care of a couple of billion people. The rise of homosexuals is another way mother nature deals with our population growth. With all of the wars and genocide going on in the world I would say about 50 million people will die due to these wars in our life time, thats a small fraction but it still makes an impact. With the whole sending humans into space scenerio, Robots would be better off for space exploration and for the developement of colonies. They are cheaper and expendable so I think it would be much cheaper to ship humans off to live on colonies than we think.

posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 12:36 AM
Why dont we start to let the frail and weak and old actually do as nature intends and let them DIE?

How much has health care cost risen because more people live longer...with more complications? How many people that cant for whatever reason survive on the planet without extensive resource consuming are artificially kept "alive" far longer and at great cost?

While it feels good to say we try and help as many as can be done....
all the food relief in africa only createn dependence upon the hand outs and does nothing to alter the physical abillity of the people to become self sustinate on land that already wont support them....

How about keeping recessant and harmful genes in the pool by keeping those aflicted alive long enough they continue to pass these traits into the reproductive stream?

posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 06:32 AM
The worlds population is fine as it is, but in the future resources are going to be less avaible so less people can survive, but things would be better off if we spread out across the globe a bit better.
here is an idea i had a while ago, looking back at it now though i'm not sure whether i'd support it.

the way to slow and then reverse the population is to make it pointless to have more than 2 children (this idea would only work in the west)
child benefits would should only be paid to first 2 children, the second child only gets half the finacial support that the first child gets.
This a bloodless and humain way to reduce the western population
the middle east is more difficult as child support doesn't exist,

[edit on 16-2-2005 by UK Wizard]

posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 03:48 PM
Back a century or two ago, there was this guy, named Charles Darwin. He theorized that natural selection would take care of people who weren't strong or fit enough to compete with their peers.

Overcrowding will cause hunger, pollution, and other problems, which will cause quite a few deaths.

Now, i'm really reaching here, but if we all don't die before that point in some nuclear or biological holocaust, the overcrowding will thin out the human population, leaving only the rich and a stronger, superior human race. So it's not totally a bad thing.

Alrighty, That's a bit too far out. But governments have no right to restrict the amount of children people have. But Corinthas had an interesting point. The world is NOT overcrowded.

I happen to live in a county with 16 people per square mile. And it's a damn big county, too. If we evenly distributed everyone, we'd be complaining about how lonely we are.

posted on Mar, 6 2005 @ 01:22 AM
How about if we just stop trying to make everyone live forever and just let people die when their time comes, instead of dreaming up all these social engineering plans. If we would stop spending billions of dollars on finding a vaccine for the ever mutating HIV virus, spending even more billions on prescription drugs for the elderly and useless, the population would be manageable in a few decades and that would just be the start of the things we could not do to control global population.

[edit on 05/3/6 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 07:54 PM
What are you talking about bro? We won't have to live in outer space. We just have to expand our limits on this planet. Right now we live on land. There's plenty of extra room in the sky and under water!

new topics

top topics


log in