of people.

At least that's the concern I remember reading about a couple of years ago in this article.

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/01/world_population_may_actually_start_declining_not_exploding.html




>you don't seem to have an explanation for why negative
>population is a problem. i'm assuming you've read a lot about
>the burdens of elder care in those nation amid declining
>populations. those *are* issues of consumption and standard of
>living.
>
>i'm saying, it's the other side of the coin as the problems
>created by unchecked population growth. the lack of
>sustainability is the issue. population projections just give
>us one limit (and there are other limits, like global warming)
>on how long we have until sustainability issues catch up to
>us.
>
>europe (and russia's) population bubbles are small, and the
>problems associated with what you're describing are going to
>be solvable. europe's peak is projected to be followed by a
>leveling off, and the level off is higher than where we are
>right now.
>
>http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Projected_population_as_of_1_January,_EU-28,_2014–80_(¹)_(2014_%3D_100)_PF15.png
>
>population leveling off in 2 generations is not a crisis. it's
>something they are planning for and working through.
>
>japan is a different story, but the lesson there one of
>unsustainable population GROWTH, not the dangers of negative
>population. population density in japan is 10x that of the
>u.s. (and the difference was greater than that at the height
>of the baby boom in both countries). the situation now is a
>direct result of that. japan actually experienced something
>akin to the crash that we'd worry about from overpopulation,
>because the population density and import costs made having
>larger families economically impossible for so many young
>japanese.
>
>south korea is facing a similar (but less dramatic) population
>bubble, and its not nearly the same crisis as it is in japan
>because the it didn't have as dramatic of an early
>economic/population explosion. south korea also seems to be
>slightly more open to re-examining it's national identity in
>order to deal with the next century than japan is.
>
>if people push the economic growth model in the next 50 years,
>it's going to be much worse in india and china than it is in
>japan currently. but it's the irresponsible growth and lack of
>planning now that's going to do the damage....not the
>declining fertility rates themselves.
>
>and there are plenty of countries in the developing world (a
>good chunk of africa for example) that show no signs of
>slowing down over the next century.
>
>the best thing that can happen to any population (assuming we
>don't gain access to new resources) over the long hall is for
>fertility rates to drop sooner rather than later and quicker
>rather than slower.
>
>you got the "underpopulation" story backwards.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"