Re: Productive Employment [was Re: Six Billion and Beyond]

From: Michael S. Lorrey (retroman@turbont.net)
Date: Sat Mar 25 2000 - 11:08:25 MST


xllb wrote:
>
> I snipped the following from the "World Population Implosion" article:
>
> "In 1995, the ratio of population between "less developed" and "more
> developed" regions stood at about four to one; in 2050, by these
> projections, it would be seven to one. The balance of population would shift
> dramatically not only between given countries but even between entire
> continents. In 1995, for example, the estimated populations of Europe
> (including Russia) and Africa (including Egypt and the Maghreb states) were
> almost exactly equal. In 2050, by these projections, Africans would
> outnumber Europeans by over three to one."

This is totally ignoring the possibility that those areas may shift
into the 'more developed' category by that point in time, and it is
based entirely on current population trends, ignoring possible future
shifts.

>
> I read an article sometime 18 to 24 months ago, online, it might have been
> "Atlantic Monthly". I believe it was titled "A Remarkable Time". I have
> tried a number of times to find it, after losing it a year or so ago. It
> predicted that population will grow to about 9 or 10 billion in the next 40
> to fifty years. Then it will slowly decrease. What's next, after that, is
> pure speculation.
>
> After reading the article, my concern was no longer increase in population,
> but rather where the increases are taking place. If, in fact, our
> population almost doubles before beginning to decline, 100% of that increase
> will take place in earth's least population friendly places. There will be
> 4 billion more newbies in the poorest parts of the world, the places that
> haven't changed in millenia. The "have's" will make up only a little over
> 10% of the population, and the 2040s' version of today's high school
> educated, store clerk, single parent, living in a slumlord's hovel, without
> medical insurance, will be one of the "haves".

The idea that the most population unfreindly places could systain a 100%
increase in population is so ludicrous on its face it is obviously based
on
false or icomplete premises.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:06:22 MDT