From 6 to 7 in 12 seconds, err, years

[eco_fan]

At least it will seem like seconds to the planet. The world population is expected to hit 7 billion next year, according to the Population Reference Bureau, see CNN's "World Population Projected to Reach 7 Billion Next Year" www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/08/12/world.population/index.html  It took 12 years to go from 5 to 6 billion, and it sounds

Comments

[chrdoesscience]

While I entirely agree that most commercial chemicals are harmful to humans and especially the environment, I'm hesitant to believe they have much to do with decreasing fecundity in developed countries

[eco_fan]

Even with fertility treatments and massively expensive procedures such as in-vitro, there are many couples that can't successfully have children who want them. While adoption is always a great option, there are the black-market downsides of it (kidnappings, smuggling and human trafficking

[chrdoesscience]

Well, there will ALWAYS be people who want children but can't have them. I just don't think that number has grown significantly when compared to our population size

[swirlingchaos]

i totally agree about the one child law. What we need is to tax the hell out of anyone with more than 2 children, rather than provide more and more support for them. Every person should get a license to have one kid, so 2 per couple. Kid dies, too bad - adopt. Divorced and lose the kid, too bad - adopt. Remarry and new partner also already used licence on first kid, too bad - adopt.

It disgusting to see people pumping out kids for the government baby bonus, the hubris of passing on their probably-flawed-all-to-hell genetic line "cause heck i turned out ok, a dozen more of me must be a GOOD thing!!", or for the pure hormone addiction of giving birth (i swear, there are actually people that get high off the hormones. A coworkers wife, in her 40s, is pumping out a kid a year because she is addicted to hormones. Its freaky)

We are literally screwing the world to death. It has to stop.

[smashboredom]

Anyone poor enough to be having kids purely for government handouts has a very low impact on the environment. And most of that impact is probably out of their hands.

But of course the massive welfare mother drain theory is a load of bullshit anyway.

[eco_fan]

I feel driven to try to find some numbers on changes in percent of the population without children over the past 4 generations, but I doubt there is actual data on whether it would be by choice or due to infertility, except recently since the trend is moving towards childless by choice. Although looking at the Baby Boomers and their parents, with the social pressure to have the family and picket fence life, I doubt many would be by choice

[smashboredom]

Have you thought about the implications of the one child law in relation to gender, or just age? You know that millions of potential parents abort their foetus simply because it turns out to be female? Have you thought about how this will impact the women who grow up vastly outnumbered by men, many of whom will have trouble finding partners?

Since you highly support the one child law I'm guessing not. And if you really think "developed" countries treat women and men more or less equally, at least you're consistent.

[chrdoesscience]

Actually, I AM aware of the infanticide induced by the one-child law as well as the age distribution issues. I actually said in my last comment, "I don't feel they really thought through the implications this would have on their population distribution in relation to age, which will likely cause some big social issues in 10-20 years," in regards to the age issue. The infanticide is, of course, a huge concern, and I do recognize it would likely occur in more developed countries, though likely to a lesser extent. I did not mean to say that the one-child law is perfect. It is clearly not. But I do believe it is a step in the right direction.

Also, in regards to the treatment of men and women: as a(n) female, asexual, agendered, atheistic feminist who has lived in both Canada and the US, I can say I have never been discriminated against for being female. I am, however, frequently discriminated against for everything else, but those are easier to hide.
Results, of course, may vary with age and locality.

[smashboredom]

I apologise for spouting feminist rhetoric at you (I did look at your journal/profile for a clue, but felt what you said seemed more like what a male might say, so went with my criticism). But, your self-quote still says "in relation to age" and nothing more. And I have a hard time reading "HIGHLY support" alongside saying it's clearly not perfect.

[chrdoesscience]

Well, I try to keep my online presence gender-neutral both because I'm agendered and because it's really interesting to see how many people accuse me of being male or female, as if either is a bad thing.
In this situation, I don't see how whether or not I have a penis/ovaries makes any difference in whether I support China's one-child law. The world is vastly over-populated and China is trying to do something to control its population. That's a hell of a lot better than anyone else, and I support the attempt even if it has glaring flaws.
Anyway, just because something isn't perfect, that doesn't mean it isn't a good idea. The theory of gravity isn't perfect, but I still HIGHLY support teaching it in school and using it in industry and science.