posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 11:16 AM
I have to say that I agree with Mulder on this thread after doing the simple arithmatic.
It is a real problem and the mathematics of it are easy to see even over the next 70 years. They are as follows.
The population is said to stand currently at 6,783,421,727 and the growth of the population of the earth, per year, is said to be about 1% annually.
(It's actually 0.883% but I rounded up). Now 1% of 6,783,421,7 is 67,834,217.3. If you multiply that figure by 70 (for 70 years), then the population
in just one human lifetime at our current rate of growth is set to increase by 4,748,395,211.
(67,834,217.3 X 70 = 4,748,395,21).
That's an increase of over 4 billion people in just one lifetime.
The population in the next 100 years will be: 6,783,421,730 (just about doubled)
150 years it will be: 10,175,132,595
200 Years it will be: 13 566 843 460
See the pattern developing? The human race cannot continue to grow at even 1%.
But depopulation needn't come from simply killing off the people we have and I think this is the point Mulder is trying to make in a fashion that is
designed to provoke thought before reaction (but is getting reaction before thought). There are means of simply stemming population growth to a lower
figure than which it is now. Part of the problem comes from the apathy of today's youth in regards to schooling. Those kids who often skip school
often skip sex education along with it and usually wind up having babies sooner than the person who did receive sex education. Herein mulder makes his
point about there being 'too many idiots'. Too many under-educated people are procreating sooner because of lack of understanding of the process and
The best way to combat this is either sensibly or drastically, depending on whether sensible fails to work. Sensible would be mandatory sex education
for everyone, regardless of whether they were in school with fixed penalties for those who fail to take the test (Let's face it, if the Tax Man can
hunt you down a similar system for these sorts of tests would be just as effective at weeding out people failing to take the Sex Ed Exam). Another way
would be to invoke Parental Licenses with fixed fees for the license. Making people pay for children is a sure-fire way to make sure that only the
very serious of parents actually go through with it (bear in mind some people have children for financial reasons, or to cheat the financial system
[in the uk where I live, younger people will often have children at around 16 simply to get a home for free from the council - this is a poor reason
to have a child] ).
The drastic way would be mandatory chemically induced chastity until a given age alongside parental and sex education exams. Say...until the age of
21, since there's very little reason for people to be thinking about having children until this age anyway.
So the point Mulder is trying to make here is rather valid indeed if we look at the evidence presented before us. That if some sort of population
growth control isn't implemented - and very very soon - we could find ourselves fighting for the spot we're stood on.