Can We Efffectively Deal With Population Growth? IMO the answer is NO!

The US government is forecasting population growth from 314 million today to about 400 million by 2050.

This is approximately the same population growth we have seen in the past 40 years.

We can reasonably assume that most of this population growth will effect the already higher population areas of the USA; within 50-100 miles of large urban centers which provide jobs, consumer choices, housing, etc.

For those of you who have lived as an adult for at least 40 years, just think of all the development and congestion and pollution that has been put in place during the past 40 years...it is really staggering how much infrastructure has been created to handle the population growth; road systems, train systems, airports, parks, public schools, universities, medical care, government facilities, etc. and how urban centers like Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Phoenix, Denver, Dallas, Chicago, Miami, New York, etc. have grown.

IMO, and the reason for this thread, I find it difficult to imagine that the collective we during the next 40 years of population growth can basically double everything we've done during the past 40 years to accommodate another 80-90 million people. I don't believe we have the proactive sense to deal with this in a timely fashion. I don't believe we have the funding it requires which is probably in the trillion$.

What is this nation going to look like when we add another 90 million people to our current system which is already bursting at the seams?

 

it's a reality that political leaders don't want to face, ignoring it for future leaders to deal with...we have economic system that relies on perpetual growth, perpetual growth is an impossiblity ...

China realized this back in the 70s and introduced the one child policy in '79...Japan has a falling population, a number of EU countries have as well... canada would have a declining population but immigration keeps it growing, political leaders are afraid to tamper with it as it would be "anti business" but they're only delaying the inevitable ...population and economic growth must eventually stop and remain at a sustainable level...

 

Yet US birth rates are down, im not sure the exact figures but i recall all Western countries are at below replacement numbers. So where is the increase coming from? Guess they expect the flood of immigrants to continue.

 

immigration supplies constant growth...the "american dream" to become an rich entrepreneur, but every new entrepreneur requires low paid labor at sometime and where are you going to find that? immigrants...educated Americans aren't going to work minimum wage jobs, so many jobs will not get done without immigrants, the country would grind to a halt unless there is immigration...it's a little like how ancient Rome relied on a constant supply of slaves to stay afloat, it's a false economy that must eventually end...

to reduce the need for immigrants minimum wages need to rise to a point where they offer a living wage so americans will do those jobs themselves and not require immigration, and everyone needs to give up the dream that they can all become rich...

 

Should be just fine. Overpopulation as something bad is a myth. Every prediction of how horrible the world would be with overpopulation has been wrong, from Malthus on.

- - - Updated - - -

Japan and Europe are graying, and will soon go under because of not enough young people working to support the retired.

 

then you must believe of infinite resources...that's is the biggest myth....the planet has finite limit of resources and sustain only a finite number of people, what that number is is debatable that there is a maximum is not debatable, it's quite possible we've already surpassed that finite number and the effects just haven't caught up to us as yet...

that's the case with every industrialized/educated country including the US, immigration just masks and delays the inevitable...

 

Getting rich would still be achievable, possibly more so. The less strain on the system in paying out 'entitlements' is less strain on business which allows it to be more competitive globally. But yes they would have to supply at least better conditions if not better pay. I completely agree the need for each generation to larger than the last one to support it is a fail model it can not go on indefinitely.

1st world countries face large problems in this regard since they have gone post industrial and have seen many of the low skilled, low paying jobs shipped off overseas.So with all 1st countries showing declining, below replacement birth rates the only place to get immigrants from in 3rd world while jobs for them have already been lost. Most will be heavily reliant on the welfare system, its completely flawed.

 

And what about the already burden on our natural resources like water and energy? The largest producing region in the USA of fruits, nuts and vegetables, the Central Valley of California, already has farms drying up and turning to tumble weeks due to a lack of water. 33% more people also means 33% more pollution, 33% more CO2 emissions, 33% more human and industrial waste, 33% more refuse, etc. I live 60 miles north of the Golden Gate bridge and it's a traffic gridlock mess; what are the chances we can afford to expand the bridge, or build a parallel bridge to handle double the traffic? What are the chances we can build a railroad track across this same area? It's not even feasible to increase our current 6 lane freeways to 10-12 lanes...we can't even procure the right-of-way much less afford the cost to build. And these are only the tip of the iceberg issues that will be impacted by 90 million more Americans and a society which does nothing until it's ass is on fire...

 

The 90 million population increase has nothing to do with the replacement numbers. If we were above 2.0 replacement maybe the increase would be 125 million...I don't know? But for this thread I am using the government forecast of 400 million by 2050 and asking 'what if'? And immigrants are part of the population increase...

 

In bold above, it's not likely you can demand higher incomes yet achieve more global competition? The US continues to outsource and import because our costs are already very high. Increasing these costs simply exacerbates the loss of jobs and competitiveness. A global economy requires that we must be able to compete in a global economy...

 

Not that the overall population number isn't of concern, but the most likely source of even greater future angst might be in which demographic segment reproduces the most in the coming decades.

Be aware of the maternity rates of Muslims vs non-Muslims in America.

Anyone looking forward to increased numbers of Muslims in America should feel encouraged by the projections of population growth by Muslims.

No fans of Planned Parenthood, they!

 

You can be globally competitive with fair wages. Lets say for example everyone was employed and looked after themselves (no handouts), education became more internet based, we removed much of the burdensome regulations from start up business, removed corrupt govt practices favoring large corporations for kickbacks. Needing less govt revenue you could lower corporate and personal taxes while increasing wages and conditions. But that'll never happen while low educated, low skilled people keep flooding western countries which have a lack of suitable jobs.

Instead the entitlements keep growing, the need for govt revenue keeps rising, business gets strangled with more regulations and taxes. The cycle is headed in the wrong direction, but its how the progressives want it.

 

An article in Sacramento Today suggests a population decline:

According to a report released this month by the USC Price School of Public Policy and the Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health, California is facing an "unprecedented decline" in its child population, a trend triggered by lower birth rates, fewer newcomers arriving in the state and a smaller population of women of child-bearing age.

Source: http://www.sacramentotoday.net/news/templates/community.asp?articleid=2933&zoneid=1

 

The US fertility rate is 2.1, which is replacement level. So the growth is all due to projected immigration.

 

We need more people, not less.

Either everyone's taxes are going to go up or we're going to bankrupt ourselves and grandma and grandpa won't be getting the medicare they were promised.

This is simple math. Over time, federal tax revenues have averaged 18.5% of GDP. By 2050, social security and medicare and medicaid will account for 18.5% of GDP.

The easiest way to get GDP up is to get more people.

 

it's a gigantic pyramid scheme which like all pyramid schemes are mathematically impossible, and when it crashes as it must those at the bottom will get nothing...

we have a social class system where McJobs and those who do them are looked down upon and undeserving of a living wage...immigrants are brought in to do jobs no else wants to do, if no one wants to do those jobs it must be because they are dirty, abusive, brutal or unattractive is some way, IMO that type of job requires more cash not a minimum...giving the poorest respectable wages which they can then spend seems a better way to stimulate the economy(and contribute to their pension plans) than tax breaks to millionaires...

 

yes there will be a convergence of climate change and population that will be disastrous for countries that fail in long term planning...

 

that's the pyramid trap it can't work indefinitely, it's better to deal with the problem now than in 50-75yrs in the future when change is forced on us...

 

Your xenophobic worries about demographics have nothing to do with this thread...please leave this thread and visit the bigot thread...

 

The sustainability of people as population grows has nothing to do with political parties or special interest groups, etc. When the water stops flowing from the spigots, it stops flowing to all people no matter their affiliations!

Where is it written that the private sector must guarantee Americans a job and a so-called living wage?

For those who actually pay attention to society and industry and economy, etc. they know that today there are 145 million jobs in the USA, of which 15 million pay minimum wage, and another 60 million earn below the median income, yet there are 160 million workers. This means a person paying attention needs to first compete to even get a job, then needs to compete to obtain a higher paying job. Those who refuse this action will remain unemployed and in poverty...now this is a guarantee!

Here's another guarantee; government is not a solution!

 

http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R707130850/b

http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/projections/p-1/

http://nextbigfuture.com/2007/04/united-states-and-california-population.html

The population of the US, and California, is increasing. You actually believe the US will add 90 million more people by 2050 and none of them will be in CA?

Today CA has about 40 million which is about 13% of the US population so by 2050 when the US population is 400 million CA will be 52 million.

Makes no difference; population growth in the US will effect all urban centers and the entire nation with the greatest emphasis in those areas that provide jobs and/or business potential.

 

I think the US allows just shy of 1 million immigrants into the US each year and if true this is about 40 million by 2050. Beyond the fertility rate you also need to consider people living longer...

 

Using potable water as an example, today we have potable water shortages in the USA. This will not get better...it will get worse. If we know we need more potable water supplies today, and even more tomorrow, then why aren't we working towards creating more available water?

Why don't we as a nation build another 500 water reservoirs, another 500 hydroelectric power facilities, maybe several desalination facilities, and pipelines and canals to distribute this water to all areas of the USA? This can be accomplished in partnership with private enterprise and government backed loans, etc. Not only does it provide water, it creates millions of middle-class paying jobs for decades. Why are we so incapable of this type of program?

 

I believe the current economic “recovery” is temporary. We will return to a recession, which will prompt young people to delay childbearing. Furthermore, I anticipate that increased levels of civil strife (a kind of Columbine to the 10th power) will make the US inhospitable, even for immigrants.

 

reservoirs a good idea, water conservation should be the priority IMO, lawns in desert states seems to me an incredible waste of a precious resource...and as climate change makes itself felt in the coming decades water in the desert regions will become even more scarce...even where I live we took water for granted,now it's becoming apparent our continuous supply is going to drop as the glaciers disappear...

where you going to build 500 hydro power plants? ...an attractive clean idea but can be detrimental for healthy waterways...

when you have tens of millions who are convinced CC is an international conspiracy concocted by Al Gore taking any preventive action will a big chore...