Overpopulation was one of the great lies of the past century. Even when Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich published The Population Bomb in 1968, demographers had already recognized that population growth had precipitously slowed in industrial countries. For instance, in 1900, the average family size in the U.S. was 4.76 people, while in 1960 it had dropped to 3.29; the fertility rate in 1900 was approximately 5.6 (down from around 7 a century earlier), and by 1960 the fertility rate had already declined to 3.6 (keeping in mind that was still at the tail end of the baby boom). The decline in France was even sharper and had set in by 1800 (graph showing fertility rates).
Sure, one could point to high fertility rates in third world countries, but that was not how the Ehrlichs' work was used. It was, instead, used to brainwash people in industrial countries that they needed to have fewer children. For instance, the novel Logan's Run (not the movie which had a different premise for why there were population constraints) postulated a future where, to combat world overpopulation and ever larger cohorts of young people, no one was allowed to live beyond 21 years, having to report to a "Sleepshop" to be be euthanized with a pleasure-inducing toxic gas.
In the video below, the host explains why the population decline is actually worse than we think. Most of it has to do with the economic impacts of declining working age populations versus growing populations of retired people, and the effects of declining demand as population shrinks. But he also notes that even the pessimistic population projections are based on unrealistic assumptions that the birthrates will, at some point, rebound.
VIDEO: "The Population Collapse is Worse Than We Thought"
Economics Help (12 min.)
Every single time.
ReplyDelete