What can we do to mitigate human overpopulation? Hard mode: no genociding

>9 billion
>not 12 billion

Overpopulation is a myth pushed by jews such as (((Paul R. Ehrlich)))

I didn't look at the number to be honest, I just agreed it will stabilize.

That chart fails to factor in all of the Africans flooding into Europe.

another round of plagues

Most developed countries are below fertility replacement rates, stoping subsidizing poor families does little
Poor countries that get aid and become wealthier would stop having so many kids.

This is the only good answer. We stand on the last demographic transition, the faster we spread knowledge of contraceptives, the less the population will grow.

Stop aiding subhuman races.

>This is the only good answer.
I don't agree because it implies that energy consumption is not a issue.
Both a reasonable population and reasonable energy consumption make the world more stable.

The OP did not ask at all about energy consumption or resource consumption, they asked about mitigating human overpopulation. If you want to talk about resource consumption, open up another thread.

Voluntarily suicide for old people

Better question: how do we accomodate for it?
Lots of people here like to complain about the sheer amount of Africans but you have to realize their population density is waaaaay lower than that of Europeans.

what can we do to mitigate depopulation? hard mode: no importing thirdworlders

>The OP did not ask at all about energy consumption or resource consumption, they asked about mitigating human overpopulation. If you want to talk about resource consumption, open up another thread.
Ok fine.
Just that OP does imply that overpopulation is the only issue.

Stop sending aid to Africa, they starve because they have 15 kids, if me and my gf had 5 kids we'd fucking starve.

>remove feminism
>remove immigration
>let the baby boomers die so families don't have to spend 50% of their income on rent.

condoms, immigration controls so only cultures that overpopulate suffer the consequences

Destroy pension system. People didn't want just children because all their money goes to elderly.

What is the benefit of mitigating depopulation? Eventually you will just have an even bigger aging population to deal with, it is better to learn how to care for the elderly and improve health so people can work for longer now.

Halt all food aid to all third world countries.

In places like Africa the population will manage itself, all you need to do is remove the technologies that allowed the population to get to the level it's at

Stop feeding the shitskins

this is actualy what people in third world countries keep saying

they want the developed world to stop bombarding them with humanitarian aid, cheap medicine and forced credit, stop treating them like retarded children and technicaly keeping corrupt despots in power, messing in their political affairs and so on, they want a chance to develop on their own and do their own thing

this tbqh

all this aid creates dependency, it's basically neo-colonialism

European countries still have a lot of stakes in Africa, it's just more subtle

>...so people can work for longer now.

that sounds like hell

only thing missing is somesort of institutionalised ''immortality'' program so you can work till your arms literaly drop off, then they fix you up with bionic new ones so you can keep on working

dont think thats enough, people are allready getting sick of feminist crap, and most are anti-immigrant, but even if the baby boomer burden was gone they would still be inhibited to start families

its like a new way of thinking is needed, a new mentality, or even a new religion, one where there are reasosns to make kids, or where the individual wievs himself and life in such a way that having kids comes spontaneously

id say for that wed need to get rid of individualism more than anything

Why is /pol/ shitting up my history board.

God I wish I was a mod.

> new way of thinking is needed, a new mentality, or even a new religion
You can't motivate people with empty words. Look at communism for an example. Society should be structured in such way that children aren't burden.

t. Literal fascist.

even one billion is too much.

Cut off any food aid, if you want food you better have a good agricultural sector or import or fucking die.

>12 billion
>not 11.75 billion

A "have one and then you're done" policy with childbirth.

thats how you do demographic collapse

>waaaah someone disagrees with he ban him

Reddit's that a way friend

Leftards hate freedom of speech

It will stablize for sure, but the overpopulation will is still and will be a thing. Mainly because poor country's inability to feed their own.

As they get richer, their population will level out.

Cheer up mate. You're a poet and you don't even know it :)

Hey grampa, those projections are outdated, Africans keep breeding out of control. The revised medium projection of the UN assumes 11.2 bn people by 2100 and it will continue to grow. The reason for the revision of the projection is that scientists assumed that fertility in Sub-Saharan Africa would drop just like in the rest of the world, which has not been the case.

esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/publications/files/key_findings_wpp_2015.pdf

theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/jan/11/population-growth-in-africa-grasping-the-scale-of-the-challenge

>Unfortunately, since the early 1990s, family planning programmes in Africa have not had the same attention, resulting in slow, sometimes negligible, fertility declines. In a handful of countries, previous declines have stalled altogether and are reversing.

global population is actually supposed to peak, stabilize, then start to actually rapidly decline under certain models

big crunch I think it was called

basically in 50 years people not having kids worldwide to stay above replacement level and all of the old people massively dying off will be a big problem and population levels will go into massive free fall and the human population is never supposed to actually grow again

t. Fascist

>depopulation
hard mode: closed borders
outlaw abortion except for medically valid reasons, all children whom their mothers declare unwanted surrender their rights as caretakers to the state. Any woman carrying a state child will have all her medical expenses related to pregnancy compensated, and the child will be seized after birth.

All married couples above a specific income bracket required to enroll in a foster-parent selective service. Any family made to sponsor a state orphan gets a tax break as a compensation.

invest in childcare resources aimed at working class people to alleviate the burden of costs in raising a child in a modern economy, encouraging them to have children above the 2.1 limit.

Scrap the current educational model, restructure it from middle school beyond to better prepare children for life as working adults: lesser scoring students enrolling in vocational programs while better scoring students prepare for college. Lecture classes imbue students with a social conscious, Logic classes teach them engineering, computer, and scientific acumen. Classes are year round but the days are shorter, with apprenticeships forming the bulk of older student's time.

One should not tolerate the intolerant.

Sterilization, One Child policies, restriction of antibiotics, healthcare, drugs etc.

The whole world would have to go full China.

Poor people with no sexual education shouldn't be allowed to breed. It's irresponsible to others as well as toward the kids who will grow up with no access to education and proper healthcare, forcing them to turn to crime.

In the 20-30 years after Roe vs. Wade was implemented, the US violent crime rate plummeted dramatically. Africa needs to have similar measures if it wishes to build stable societies.

are you implying it would be a bad thing ?

The big problem is that development actually decreases birth rates.

People will have more kids the less likely it is each individual kid will survive, because there isn't exactly social security, and having children that survive is the only way to make it to old age.

More social insurances im not even memeing the lack of any of these in poor countries is the reason why they need so many children. Someone has to take care of them when they are old or ill and cant work anymore

>World
No you mean Africa, South America,and East Asia.

But user you are intolerant for not tolerating his intolerance you hypocrite.

No, western countries are going to have to weaken pension systems and geriatric care institutions. These people don't produce anything and are a net drain on society. The longer they live, the more people are going to have to labor to support them in old age.

Dont give a shit western places are not overpopulated.

Wut? Germany is nearly as overpopulated as much of India. The reason they're performing so shy economically is because pension systems are draining the tax dollars of the populace.

You need to control the population of the aging populace or the system isn't sustainable.

Those old guys built the country from scrap and ruins, they deserve their pensions.

India has over a billion people, Germany doesnt even have as many humans as Bangledesh.

Again overpopulation is for Africa, South America, Middle East, and East Asia, not Europe or North America end of discussion.

At the expense of the younger generations quality of life?
We're not talking overall population, we're talking density. Of course India is going to have more people than Germany, it's a subcontinent with a gigantic landmass, unlike Germany. There needs to be some form of population control so that productive people are born and welfare leeches are kept to a minimum.

"Overpopulated" is a ratio, not an absolute number.

Germany is rich as fuck. They will continue to have much, much higher standards of living than India.

No one here knows shit about the world so asking for tips on overpopulation is futile.

In India not Germany.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Countries_by_Population_Density_in_2015.svg

here's the population density map of the world

absolutely trash bureaucracy does a good job of that.

>In the vast territory which includes Benin, Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire, Gabon, Central African Republic, Chad and Togo, an area six times the size of France, has only 77 million people to France's 63 million.

Those living standards aren't currently sustainable though. Indias are.

Europe is overly dense though and can be thought up of as too much population density which is pretty bad in it's own way.

It's the most dense out of any continent by far with most countries having a notably high density compared to other continent's where it massively fluctuates.

Genocide third worlders.

Inferno was such a bad movie

You know, a lot of those resources come from fossil fuels which are being phased out as primary energy sources as we speak.

>human
>overpopulation

Most of the population consume basically no resources. The vast majority of waste - and the *entire* problem of 'overpopulation' - comes from an extreme minority of people who could be easily targeted with limits and standards if they didn't control the global political system.

Overpopulation is more of a quality of life issue than it is a resources one.

The planet COULD support up to and including 20 billion humans, but the vast majority of those people would be living in total poverty. There would not be enough resources to give everyone a decent standard of living, and that's assuming a one world government where things are run more smoothly. As it stands now, we need to control population growth so that living standards can catch up in less developed parts of the world.

No not really. We have more then enough resources but it's just horribly inefficient (compare western to developing agriculture), wasteful (modern supermarkets) or focused towards one group and everything bring maintained so that group benefits the most while others are left out.

Shut up jew.

Yeah, but that would require a massive mentality shift and a change in the way we live our lives, which isn't likely to happen.

People said that many times in the past about many things.

Educating women and giving them careers. Major studies show this reduces fertility rates in first world and third world countries.

>we need to control population growth so that living standards can catch up in less developed parts of the world.

Even pretending all populations leveled out tomorrow, barring literal miracles in nuclear energy and negative emissions technologies this is still an extinction scenario. Convincing those who have it to give it up is the only survivable path, and population simply is not part of the problem.

And? Things are still fundimentally the same societally as they have been for much of history. There's the haves and the have nots, people seek to improve their status in society, profit is what drives buisness more than anything. We strive for comfort and security as always.

For people to suddenly go "We need to sacrifice our quality of life because it's wasteful" would be very difficult.

So essentially, we go full Khmer Rogue?

>extinction scenario

Nigga please.

You're talking about a species that has successfully inhabited everything from -60 degree arctic tundra to 120 degree desert.

Global industrial civilization might collapse, but as long as humans have fire and spears, there's a niche for them on this planet.

>Education in third-world countries
>Implement better farming techniques in third-world countries
>Birth control, esp. in third-world countries
>Possibly space in the very long term
Also not Veeky Forums related

>You're talking about a species that has successfully inhabited everything from -60 degree arctic tundra to 120 degree desert.

You're talking about a species that has only survived two tiny atom bombs but still feels cocky enough to keep ~2581 strategic warheads on high alert, more soon if China brings theirs on like they're planning to. A species that has spent the last year losing its global shit over a 5 million-refugee crisis while determinedly planning to inflict one ~forty times larger on itself in twenty to thirty years. Barring (again) literal miracles, we're going down with all hands and if fire and spears have a problem with that they can write a letter to the editor or whatever.

No if they were included the line would slope downward more

>At the expense of the younger generations quality of life?
Worthless little shits, most of them. And they wouldn't have anything if it weren't for those old folks who built it all.

I'm one of those worthless little shits, and I will happily pay my grandparents' pensions.

That said, I would just as happily evade all taxes and dismantle the welfare system because it's a hugely bloated affair that disincentivizes individual responsibility.

Western countries and East Asia will drop in population, leaving emerging developing countries to replace them which will stabilize things. Problem solved.

>For people to suddenly go "We need to sacrifice our quality of life because it's wasteful" would be very difficult.

Well there was the whole environment standards in the US that popped up after people had enough of the pollution that was going on.

>that sounds like hell
And? I can't change the laws of physics. Population can't increase forever.

Either we go full Logan's Run or we work a little longer and invest more in social welfare. It is better we adapt and prepare for it now before pollution, climate change and resource depletion become bigger problems.

It works like this. People get good healthcare and when they are 50 to 70 they work in warm comfy offices. Because most of the workforce works cosy office jobs this increases the demand for manual labor and more people in their 20s and 30s take the higher paid manual labor jobs.

Trucking up the elderlies pensions as well as my own is not worth it.

The minute a government says "We ain't paying" people will riot because they wasted years to paying into it because a 30+ yearpromise broken with money involved someone is gonna get shot/hurt.

user, we've detonated well over 2,000 nuclear weapons already.

No you just flooded the manual labour market. The only reason those manual labour jobs pay well is because the labour base for them is small. Hell the whole meme about manual labour jobs being high paying comes with a catch like every other high paying job and usually the "join x field meme" is a ploy some do to drive down wages/salaries in a certain field.

Same reasons hospitals understaff a lot. You pay less and the doctors and nurses accept it because they get paid more even if they have to work a fuckton of overtime.

Feminism and related politics will drive the sexes apart.

>What can we do to mitigate human overpopulation?

Natural circumstance will level it out - it is inevitable.

Do nothing

Famine, disease and war will cut down the human population to a stable equilibrium between the birth rate and mortality rate. If there is room for population increase then population increase will occur, and if there is excess population then the excess will perish.

>inb4 edgy

Nothing, it's mitigating itself.

Yeah, but that was because pollution was affecting their quality of life. Now they just export all the waste and garbage to Africa and South East Asia where they pile up in huge toxic landfills.