I won't be around to see it, but the U.N. says we're headed to a world population of 10 billion by 2100. I suspect they are wrong, and hope that this estimate is not agenda-driven.
There are many indications that growth is slowing in almost all countries of the world, and that as living standards go up, fertility goes down.
It's easier to deliver health than wealth, but once a country has health, wealth seems to follow, and with it, lower fertility. So high rates of growth are just an inevitable phase--the "poor and healthy" phase--between "poor and sick" and "rich and healthy."
Silliest Statement award goes to John Bongaarts: "Can we feed 10 billion people? Probably. But we obviously would be better off with a smaller population."
Really? Obviously?
Last I checked, "we" are much better off than we were 100 years ago, or even 25 years ago, in terms of poverty, health, literacy, and access to education.
How can anyone be so sure that more people are necessarily--obviously--a bad thing for "us?"
No comments:
Post a Comment