Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evaluation

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Why Population Matters

With the world confronting a host of major crises relating to climate, energy, severe poverty, food, the global economy and political instability, why should anyone be concerned about population? The simple answer is that virtually all of the major problems that confront the world today relate in some critical way to population growth. :ranger:

While public concern about rapid population growth has subsided in recent decades, world population is still growing at about 80 million people a year. If current trends persist, there will 2.5 billion more people on the planet by mid-century, bringing the total to about 9.2 billion. That projected population growth raises a host of questions about the future of humanity and the planet we inhabit.

Most importantly, will we be able to feed 9.2 billion people? This year, for the first time in history, over 1 billion people go to bed hungry every day. High food prices and the global economic recession have pushed 100 million more people than last year into chronic hunger and poverty. And, looking ahead, we know that climate change, rising energy prices, and growing water scarcity will make it harder, not easier, to grow the crops necessary to feed an expanding population. Mounting soil erosion and the loss of farm land will also add to the challenge of boosting food production.

And it's not just food that's potentially in short supply. Water scarcity is a growing concern. In many parts of the world today, major rivers at various times of the year no longer reach the ocean. In some areas, lakes are going dry and underground water aquifers are being rapidly depleted. And climate change, of course, will make the water situation even more critical. Drier areas will be more prone to drought, wetter areas more prone to flooding, and the summer runoff from snowpack and glaciers will diminish

As food, water, and other resources are strained by the escalating demands of a growing world population, the number of environmental refugees in the world will rise"¦and so will the potential for conflict and civil war.

Fortunately, for all of us, there is one simple strategy that will help to address all these problems: provide universal access to voluntary family planning and reproductive health services. There are over 100 million women in the world today who want to space or limit their pregnancies, but who lack knowledge of, or access to, modern methods of contraception. By educating and empowering women, and giving them access to family planning services, we can save lives, strengthen families, fight poverty, preserve the environment, and help achieve a world population that can live in harmony with the planet.

The Population Institute

The Population Institute

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

The Population Challenge: Key to Global Survival

Stabilizing the growth of the world's human population is a goal that must be achieved if we are to preserve our options for the future and improve the odds for the world's sustainability. Challenges such as climate change and global warming, fragile and failed states, migration and refugee crises, food and water insecurity, poverty, disease, debt, and illiteracy are caused or exacerbated by unchecked rapid population growth.

the Report: http://www.populationinstitute.org/external/files/reports/21st_centry.pdf

The Population Institute

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

India's Young Population Higher than China, an Advantage???????

Japanese Growing Old Age Population and its Effects on the Society, China on the same path-

once we discussed, Indian young age population is very high because of high population growth, a good sign. while China soon going to suffer problems due to old aged people, which will be similar to how Japan facing this issue at present. and here i remembered a discussing with my Russians friends once, the country which has been suffering reduction in population,-"what will the Indians do when these young age people will get older after 30-40 years? will you have twice population than today to support them?"-


and then we discussed, "even if a Japanese or Chinese family has one kid, he/she is well educated, well established and can support his/her parents. and if on average 5 to 8 kids taking birth in common families of Bangladesh, over 85% population of Bangladesh suffering from Malnutrition, and 90% of them "generally" keep favoring Islamic fanaticism on different platform, the purpose of their sperms being used, which can't be thrown to Bay of Bengal itself.........

and the people on the world platform ask very first question, "oil prices have risen from $30/barrel in 2003 to $100+/barrel to date because of high demands from high population countries, but why would we pay its high price while sitting in Australia, for example, which is twice bigger to India by size and has population at around 23million, same as the total number of kids taking birth in India every year?"
and its very true about other resources like Iron ore, natural gas, coal etc whose prices are now very high for whole world, just because of high demands from high population countries.......

again here, why would the world gets finally 'finished' one day due to higher Green House Emission by high population countries, just because we can't put a nail over these highly populated countries???? why would the people in other countries pay high price for reduced carbon emission, just because others may keep increasing it due to high population growth, as this is what they can do, as no one can stop them, no matter what?....

(for example, population of India was 341 million in 1947, at the time of freedom, while its well closed to 1.3billion. Population of Pakistan was 34million while its well closed to 200million at present, while population of Bangladesh was around 36million in 1947 and its well over 160million to date....... at the same time minorities are almost finished in Pakistan, with news of Shia-Sunni-Ahmadi Sectarian Wars within Muslims itself there. on the other side, population of Hindus in India reduced from 88% in 1947 to below 80% to date, while that of Muslims in India rose from 8% to 16%+ of total population of India during this period. while the condition of Buddhist and Hindu minorities in Bangladesh is being discussed in the thread as below-)
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...gs-new-challenge-delhi-police.html#post953493

and also, how long exactly the Indian Middle Class itself may bear Subsidy burden of Indian poor, and whether they will remain capable enough in future too? 50%+ population of India, 650million, is based in Agriculture only, contributing hardly 16% in Indian GDP, while the same output can be well achieved by less than 100million people? even half of the 600million people living in Indian cities just struggle to have a decent life......

we do need to understand the meaning of "Population Based on Resource Sufficiency Evaluation", either today or tomorrow :thumb:

 

[jouni]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

I guess that in Vietnam they do not teach you how to make your point in a sustainable way.

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

I guess that in Vietnam they do not teach you how to make your point in a sustainable way.

look, i have already mentioned this issue in the thread as below, on the day of my introduction. and yes, people are here concerned with my nationality and Im "Overseas Citizen of India", OCI passport i hold. so anyhow im not qualified to put Indian flag on my profile..... and my location at present is clearly mentioned.
=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/introductions-greetings/63870-good-day-gentlemen.html#post963998

also, Vietnam itself falls among the high population density countries, so this thread would mean for Vietnam too :ranger:

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Welcome to the Sustainable World Initiative

What is the Sustainable World Initiative?
We are a global initiative based in Washington D.C. working to create a more viable future world for all people and life on the planet. The Sustainable World Initiative's (SWI) efforts are focused on the biological and geo-physical realities of planet Earth, and on the need for human activities to be in reasonable balance with the finite resources of one planet.
The path towards global sustainability will involve a true understanding and reassessment of the balance between human needs and environmental resources. SWI seeks to foster a broader and deeper discussion of sustainability and promote greater collaboration between the leading thinkers in the field.

Background and Mission
Fundamental changes are occurring in our world today, as the global scale of human activity pushes against and often exceeds nature's capacity to support life. Climate change, peak oil, fresh water shortages, waste overload, and rapid biodiversity loss are just a few signs that humans are exceeding the planet's natural resource limits. In light of the complex nature of the issues facing our world today, SWI's mission is to boost public understanding of sustainability, clarify the challenges that lie ahead, outline the steps needed to achieve true sustainability, and inspire people to act.

How are we different from other "sustainable development" initiatives?
"Sustainable development" is a term that is gaining popularity throughout the world. The most common usage of this term is in reference to human development programs or projects that are done in a resource-efficient manner, and that generally improve the overall relationship between economic activity and the demand humans place on nature. Sustainable development initiatives are extremely important in today's world of limited and declining resources, but they may be insufficient to deal with the issues at hand.

Check out our Sustainability Calculator to get an idea of what sustainability means.

//swinitiative.com/

//swinitiative.com/

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Sustainability Calculator

With rising affluence and world population projected to reach 9.3 billion by 2050, can we live sustainably?

Over the past half century, we have made a lot of progress in eliminating poverty, reducing hunger, and improving living conditions, but resources are limited, and humanity's ecological footprint is large"¦and growing. We are already using essential resources, like fresh water, at an unsustainable rate. Will we be able to meet the basic needs of 9.3 billion people in 2050 "¦without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their needs? There is no precise answer to that question, but by some estimates we could need more than 2 Earths by 2050. And that is not sustainable. :ranger:

There are many factors that go into determining whether we can live sustainably. This simplified calculator uses four key variables—population, lifestyles, energy mix, and agricultural productivity—to give us a better understanding of what will be needed to sustain projected population growth in various regions of the world. For purposes of this interactive exercise, the resources required to meet basic human needs are expressed in units of land.

//swinitiative.com/calculator/

//swinitiative.com/calculator/

we have to put 'http:' in the beginning of the above link, as i can't post link at present.

.

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

double post

 

[sgarg]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

The human population is a sustainable world must not be more than 600 million. And these 600 million humans must live humbly and frugally.

There is no way this planet can support 7 billion humans drenched in wasteful living.

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

The human population is a sustainable world must not be more than 600 million. And these 600 million humans must live humbly and frugally.

There is no way this planet can support 7 billion humans drenched in wasteful living.

thats why we favor a "Population Tax" to be denoted to climate change organizations to reduce effects of every child taking birth, as discussed in post#17

the world as whole has to start from somewhere in this regard, either today or tomorrow :thumb:

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

World faces overpopulation 'disaster' as number of people is set to rise by 75 million EACH YEAR

Global population is expected to peak at 9.5bn in 2075

Annual rise is the equivalent of entire UK population

Each year the number of people in the world is due to rise by 75million - equivalent to the entire population of the UK.

Most of the growth will be in the African continent, which is following in the industrial footsteps of Asia, and in cities.

The world's urban population is likely to increase from a 2007 figure of 3.3billion to 6.4billion in 2050.

But without drastic changes there will not be sufficient resources to provide people with basic human needs such as water, food, energy and shelter, says the report, entitled Population: One Planet, Too Many People?

Climate change is likely to place even more stress on resources, resulting in as many as a billion people moving from inhospitable regions.

Water requirements are projected to rise by 30 per cent by 2030 while food resources will be stretched by a doubling of demand for agricultural produce by 2050.

Slum living, already forced on a third of the world's urban populations, will become even more widespread as cities became increasingly packed with people.

As a result billions could be at risk of hunger, thirst and appalling living conditions, creating tinderbox conditions that could ignite civil unrest and conflict.

The report, compiled with the help of more than 70 engineers around the world, sets out a series of 'engineering development goals' as a first step towards averting the looming disaster.

It calls for a global engineering initiative, modelled on the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals, to tackle the key problem areas of energy, water, food, urbanisation and finance.

Lead author Dr Tim Fox said: 'Towards the end of the century the world is going to come face to face with the challenges of the largest population explosion in human history.

'These headline figures really are staggering from a resources point of view and for the provision of the basic needs of human society.'

Engineering solutions such as reducing energy waste, improving food storage and extracting water from underground aquifers would allow the world to sustain a population of 9.5billion, said Dr Fox.

The cost would run into many trillions of pounds, but would be affordable if richer nations were willing to share financial as well as technological resources.

A key necessity is to help poorer nations 'leapfrog' the resource-hungry 'dirty' phase of industrialisation.

As population levels soar in newly emerging industrialised countries, those in developed parts of the world such as the UK and US are likely to stabilise or even fall, said the report.

The population of Europe is expected to decline by 20 per cent by 2050. However, the impact of global population growth would still be felt around an increasingly connected world where changes in one region could have an impact 'many thousands of miles away'.

dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1346357/World-faces-overpopulation-disaster-number-people-set-rise-75-million-EACH-YEAR.html

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Population growth biggest threat to India's development

Rising population is the greatest threat to the sustainable development in India, a policy maker has told a recent summit.

Rural areas in particular must receive better formal education on environmental issues to improve the quality of stewardship.

SP Singh, a planning advisor to the state of Uttarakhand said that the failure to manage population in the Gangetic plains of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Jharkhand could lead to the disruption of natural resource management in Himalayan region. :ranger:

Singh called for improvements in society's understanding of the economic and environmental impact of ecosystem services.

He also said a system of accountability was required to prevent the indiscriminate use of natural resources.

At an international level, Indian politicians are calling for the right to use their resources to pursue development, without externally imposed constraints from the UN.

The Environmental concerns and sustainable development conference, organised by the Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development (IESD), Banaras Hindu University, also heard a plea for local knowledge to come to the fore.

"Wisdom emerging from the local community is a better method for sustainable development," said Professor PS Ramakrishnan, Jawaharlal Nehru University, who pointed to political conflict as the main driver of environmental degradation.

India is currently facing the "perfect storm" scenario of escalating climate impacts, rapidly growing population and increasing development all putting pressure on food security and ecosystem health.

Instilling sustainability concepts for developing nations, such as efficient cook stoves and clean lighting can have benefits for human health and the environment.

The Sundarbans habitat, which spans Indian and Bangladeshi territory is currently under is facing immense environmental pressures and could soon be home to a new coal power station.

rtcc.org/2012/03/07/population-growth-biggest-threat-to-indias-development/

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

The Effects of Population Growth on Economic Development
By Ploni Almoni, eHow Contributor

Population growth is closely tied to economic development. On the one hand, labor shortages will slow the rate of economic growth in industrialized countries, but on the other hand, a high birthrate in a developing country may stress limited renewable resources. :ranger: Governments in western and other industrialized countries like Japan are challenged to create effective immigration policies and programs to increase the birthrate, while countries with weaker economies pursue public health policies to reduce population growth. Globally, a smaller population presents multiple benefits from an ecological perspective, but some economies are challenged by low birthrates and are redirecting their need for unskilled labor to countries with higher populations and lower wage demands.

ehow.com/list_6515170_effects-population-growth-economic-development.html#ixzz29excMtKN

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Low-Population-related benefits

Impact on health care

It is reported that the focus of China on population control helps provide a better health service for women and a reduction in the risks of death and injury associated with pregnancy. At family planning offices, women receive free contraception and pre-natal classes.

Increased savings rate

The individual savings rate has increased since the one-child policy was introduced. This has been partially attributed to the policy in two respects. First, the average Chinese household expends fewer resources, both in terms of time and money, on children, which gives many Chinese more money with which to invest. Second, since young Chinese can no longer rely on children to care for them in their old age, there is an impetus to save money for the future.[42]

Economic growth

The original intent of the one-child policy was economic, to reduce the demand of natural resources, maintaining a steady labor rate, reducing unemployment caused from surplus labor, and reducing the rate of exploitation.[43][44] The CPC's justification for this policy was based on their support of Mao Zedong's supposedly Marxist theory of population growth, though Marx was actually witheringly critical of Malthusianism.[44][45]

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy#Non-population-related_benefits

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Overpopulation 'is main threat to planet'

Climate change and global pollution cannot be adequately tackled without addressing the neglected issue of the world's booming population, according to two leading scientists.:ranger:

Professor Chris Rapley, director of the British Antarctic Survey, and Professor John Guillebaud, vented their frustration yesterday at the fact that overpopulation had fallen off the agenda of the many organisations dedicated to saving the planet.

The scientists said dealing with the burgeoning human population of the planet was vital if real progress was to be made on the other enormous problems facing the world.

"It is the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about" Professor Guillebaud said. "Unless we reduce the human population humanely through family planning, nature will do it for us through violence, epidemics or starvation."

Professor Guillebaud said he decided to study the field of human reproduction more than 40 years ago specifically because of the problems he envisaged through overpopulation.

His concerns were echoed by Professor Rapley, an expert on the effects of climate change on the Antarctic, who pointed out that this year an extra 76 million people would be added to the 6.5 billion already living on Earth, which is twice as many as in 1960.

By the middle of the century, the United Nations estimates that the world population is likely to increase to more than nine billion, which is equivalent to an extra 200,000 people each day. Professor Rapley said the extra resources needed to sustain this growth in population would put immense strains on the planet's life-support system even if pollution emissions per head could be dramatically reduced.

"Although reducing human emissions to the atmosphere is undoubtedly of critical importance, as are any and all measures to reduce the human environmental 'footprint', the truth is that the contribution of each individual cannot be reduced to zero. Only the lack of the individual can bring it down to nothing," Professor Rapley says in an article for the BBC website.

"So if we believe that the size of the human 'footprint' is a serious problem - and there is much evidence for this - then a rational view would be that along with a raft of measures to reduce the footprint per person, the issue of population management must be addressed."

Professor Rapley says the explosive growth in the human population and the concomitant effects on the environment have been largely ignored by many of those concerned with climate change. "It is a bombshell of a topic, with profound and emotive issues of ethics, morality, equity and practicability," he says.

"So controversial is the subject that it has become the Cinderella of the great sustainability debate - rarely visible in public, or even in private.

"In interdisciplinary meetings addressing how the planet functions as an integrated whole, demographers and population specialists are usually notable by their absence.''

Professor Guillebaud, who co-chairs the Optimum Population Trust, said it became politically incorrect about 25 years ago to bring up family planning in discussing the environmental problems of the developing world. The world population needed to be reduced by nearly two-thirds if climate change was to be prevented and everyone on the planet was to enjoy a lifestyle similar to that of Europeans, Professor Guillebaud said.

An environmental assessment by the conservation charity WWF and the Worldwatch Institute in Washington found that humans were now exploiting about 20 per cent more renewable resources than can be replaced each year.

Professor Guillebaud said this meant it would require the natural resources equivalent to four more Planet Earths to sustain the projected 2050 population of nine billion people.

"The figures demonstrate the folly of concentrating exclusively on lifestyles and technology and ignoring human numbers in our attempts to combat global warming," he said. "We need to think about climate changers - human beings and their numbers - as well as climate change."

Some environmentalists have argued that is not human numbers that are important, but the relative use of natural resources and production of waste such as carbon dioxide emissions. They have suggested that the planet can sustain a population of nine billion people or even more provided that everyone adopts a less energy-intensive lifestyle based on renewable sources of energy rather than fossil fuels.

But Professor Guillebaud said: "We urgently need to stabilise and reduce human numbers. There is no way that a population of nine billion - the UN's medium forecast for 2050 - can meet its energy needs without unacceptable damage to the planet and a great deal of human misery."

Crowded Earth

* The human population stands at 6.5 billion and is projected to rise to more than 9 billion by 2050.

* In less than 50 years the human population has more than doubled from its 1960 level of 3 billion.

* China is the most populous country with more than 1.3 billion people. India is second with more than 1.1 billion.

* By about 2030 India is expected to exceed China with nearly 1.5 billion people.

* About one in every three people alive today is under the age of 20, which means that the population will continue to grow as more children reach sexual maturity.

* Britain's population of 60 million is forecast to grow by 7 million over the next 25 years and by at least 10 million over the next 60 years, mainly through immigration.

* This is equivalent to an extra 57 towns the size of Luton (pop 184,000)

* By the time you have finished reading this column, an estimated 100 babies have been born in the world.

independent.co.uk/environment/overpopulation-is-main-threat-to-planet-521925.html

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Muslims, comprise 14.6% of the Indian population and growing much faster then the Hindu population. Because the Muslims population is poorer and Muslims are allowed up to four wives this trend is going to continue or even increase.

Stage 4. Establish Regional Control.
Population density 20%-50% (Europe, India 2020?). After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues.
Stage 5. Total Control, Brutal Suppression, and Dhimmitude.
Population density > 50%.

When you add the above problem and the Maoist groups, known as Naxalites India is facing chaos and its veryvsurvival is going to be a problem.

@rocky.idf

hmmmm, if i have to favor then i would favor to shift excess population of India to ocean only

you have to reduce population of india, either this or that way. total middle class of india is well closed to 500million at present, while population of india was hardly around 341mil at the time of freedom, 1947. and this extra 750million population are just "Subsidy Burden"

no one wants shiits, and why would the other parts of world invites shiits from India?

we strongly favor Population Tax on every second kid taking birth in any part of world, to be donated to World Bank to reduce its effects on Climate Change/ high prices of resources due to high population too, as discussed in posts as below

look, few points everyone knows on the world platform in today's world, no need to read articles, as below:

1st; High Population means high consumption of resources, and hence its higher prices for the people of whole world.

2nd; high energy consumption and hence higher green house gas emission, hence increasing Climate Change threats this way

3rd; High Subsidy to feed poor below poverty line, especially in case of India. which is possible only until its Middle Class may afford it. and we must avid that breaking point ......

4th; we also encourage a "Population Tax" on every second kid taking birth in a family, which may be denoted to World Bank/ Climate Change Organizations to reduce its effects. i mean, if you can't reduce population then at least pay something to reduce its effects on the world's Climate Change. and yes, this "Population Tax" on the 'non-first' child would be same for the people of whole world. :ranger:

:thumb:

We need "Population Tax" on every 'additional' child of World

to be paid by India and rest of the world, both

with the suggestion of OCP (One child Policy) or TCP (Two child Policy), i favor 'Population Tax' on every child taking birth in world, after the first one. say, $10,000 for the second one, $100,000 for the 3rd child, and $2.0million/ $5.0million each for the next ones.......

I mean, if soneone want to put any burden on the country, on the world as whole/ on the Environment-Climate Change/ high resource consumption this way, then that family would first pay for it :thumb:

I even favor, 50% of the "Population Tax" to be paid to the world bank, to handle the global environmental issue due to this 'additional' population. i mean, if any person of India wants more than one child, then half of the "Population Tax" to be paid to the Indian government to handle the related consequences on India, the nation, and half of the Population Tax to be given to World Bank to handle the environmental issues due to India's "additional" population.

(and hence, the same we may demand from the rest of the countries too, pay "Population Tax" to World Bank to handle the related Environmental/High Resource Consumption issues, on every 'non-first' child taking birth in any family of world, based in any country :ranger:.)

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Aren't you talkin Sanjay Gandhi? Every man - rich or poor, Hindu or Muslim knows how many kids is good for him. Nogood for the govt/state to interfere in this. Major portions of the earth's land surface and resources are being enjoed by the minority WCC. This must be changed. Equality and economic justice should be practiced on all.

Says Sanjay -Gandhi. -Nah, -no. -We -must -become -strong -and -powerful -to -ensure equal -and -fair - distribution -of -world's -resources, landscape, employment, -food -and -education.

Fertility rate, total (births per woman) | Data | Table

They say societies/cultures loose their identity and eventually existence with a fertility rate below 2.11. Look at the attachment. The White Man is concerned.At this trend USA will have 50 mlln Muslims in 50 years.

(the above Rocky is a Bangladeshi member on a different forum.)


look, you have to first discuss the major issue. and that is, why would the other parts of world share "expanses"/"feed" people of overly populated country? for example, even in your family, a person may simply say, "i don't want to bear expanses of another family member even if i earn quite high as compare to him/her."

here, the very basic issue is, "who will feed people of overly populated countries?" and then number of religious clashes also come, which is also a major issue in this regard too. as, no one wants to invite Sectarian Wars, mainly concerning Islamic Fanaticism, a rude but a straightforward statement.......

and hence, we must have Population Based on Resource Sufficiency Evaluation, to feel proud first that we may feed the people taking birth on our land. we simply can't throw our shiits on others, and hence we must have a population we may successfully feed by the limited resources we have in any particular country :thumb:


=>

What's the point in having a higher per capita if all the money is trapped into the hands of Ambani's, Tata's, Birlas's and Netas ?? What is the point in having the 10th(nominal) largest economy while 60% of your population is poor & 33% piss poor among those(no food, no shelter)?

Actually, It doesn't matter until we seek equal distribution of wealth. I'm not saying that give it for free, instead generate employment.
Things are not that rosy. Isn't it?? But I think, we can make it rosy.

they are Billionaires not because they have money in pocket. they are "The Industrialists" in form of the industries they run, to provide employment/ generate taxes, developing technologies to change life of common people and hence building the nation this way



=> and there is a difference between Islam and other religions. check, you will find more than half of the Muslim population below age 20. even if you go to Britain/UK, you will find the same result...... :ranger:

over 500 Million+ Muslims are based in South Asia itself. even about India, population of Hindus was well over 88% at the time of freedom, in 1947, while its well below 80% at present...... while about Pakistan, minorities are almost gone, Shia-Sunni-Ahmadies problem there we find now. while state of minorities in Bangladesh is also being discussed in the thread as below

//defenceforumindia.com/forum/internal-security/63875-bangladeshi-criminal-gangs-new-challenge-delhi-police-3.html#post956350

=>

The Muslim population in Britain has grown by more than 500,000 to 2.4 million in just four years, according to official research collated for The Times.

The population multiplied 10 times faster than the rest of society, the research by the Office for National Statistics reveals. In the same period the number of Christians in the country fell by more than 2 million.

Ethnic Cleansing: White British Driven Out of Cities | The New Observer

One in 10 people under 25 are Muslim, while Christianity is in decline, the 2011 UK census reveals. An explosion in the Muslim population and an aging Christian demographic could mean Islam will be the dominant religion in the UK in 10 years.

Islam could be dominant UK religion in 10 years – census analysis — RT News

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

double post

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

now poverty of India is because of its over population. Most of the problems of India is because of its Over Population and India has to reduce its population only. otherwise India has around 350mil Upper Middle Class, more than total population in 1947, whose per capita income on PPP is similar to the Very High HDI countries like Argentina, Poland, Saudi Arabia etc. one day I calculated as below:-

Over-Population Notes

World is changing and few points everyone knows on the world platform in today's world, no need to read articles, as below:

1st; High Population means high consumption of resources, and hence its higher prices for the people of whole world.

2nd; high energy consumption and hence higher green house gas emission, hence increasing Climate Change threats this way

3rd; High Subsidy to feed poor below poverty line, especially in case of India. which is possible only until its Middle Class may afford it. and we must avid that breaking point :tup:

4th; and, we also encourage a "Population Tax" on every second kid taking birth in a family, which may be denoted to World Bank/ Climate Change Organizations to reduce its effects. i mean, if you can't reduce population then at least pay something to reduce its effects on the world's Climate Change. and yes, this "Population Tax" on the 'non-first' child would be same for the people of whole world. :coffee:

.
Few Key Points I always mention on this Topic as below:

these are my own ideas so it does require criticism by other members to make the topic interesting :thumb:

1st; if the poor of India ask the Western nations to share the burden of subsidies then they will simply kick these shiits of India, isn't it? and if its only Indian Middle Class who is generating money and running government and also paying heavy price for the welfare/subsidies for poor, then they do have a right to ask the Indian Government, "to what extent they will have to bear this burden of tax just to feed poor, and whether they will remain capable enough in future also to bear this burden on long run if the government doesn't control the population?????"

like the news as below, around 50% indian population is based in agriculture only, around 600mil, while even 200mil population may produce the same agriculture output? and the same in cities of India, around 50% people just try to earn a decent salary which they can't, simply because too many mouths and limited resources. and Indian Middle Class is just paying high price to feed these around 600mil 'excess' population, but still there is no effort to have a control on this growing population????

"As per statistics, India provides around Rs855 billion subsidy to its farmers to reduce their production cost, whereas Pakistan hardly spends Rs8 billion in this regard. India's agriculture production cost was around two to three times lower than Pakistan due to these subsidies," agriculture expert and Agri Forum Pakistan chairman, Ibrahim Mughal said.

[agricorner.com/mfn-status-to-ruin-agriculture-industry-alike/]MFN status to ruin agriculture, industry alike | Agriculture Corner]

2nd; here for example of Pakistan and Bangladesh, right now overly populated Pakistan is full of target killings, simply because too many mouth and no resources to feed them. its also similar to 'genocide' itself?????? and Bangladeshis just want to run from Bangladesh, mainly to India. its the worse to see people dying without dignity than controlling population by force........

Don't hold your breath: during a recent DPC rally in Karachi, speaker after speaker made it clear that their real enemies are India and America. This assembled galaxy clearly failed to notice the uncomfortable fact that over the last decade, well over 30,000 innocent civilians and 5,000 security personnel have been killed in terrorist attacks launched by jihadi militants.Such mundane truths often escape our religious brigade.

[dawn.com/news/696249/save-us-from-our-defenders]Save us from our defenders - DAWN.COM]

3rd; many economists of India advocate "food security"/ "free medicines"/ "right to get a job" etc in India which is not possible until the Indian government may control its population. they simply can't feed 1.25bil population from the limited natural resources they have . USA is 3 times bigger in area than India but population of India is 4 times to USA? and on the top of that, Indian government wants to give welfare/ heavy subsidies to its people? if India face a sudden fall like ASEAN in late 90s and South America like in 80s, all these they will have to withdraw after that so better they keep habit to live in less and get rid off the unnecessary subsidies/welfares . for example, we always find Pakistan increasing petrol and diesel prices as per market prices as they can't afford to give subsidies while the people of Pakistan are poorer than India, but Indian government always hesitate to do so? but the day India will reach level of Pakistan, just one good economic fall is required, and India will learn all by themselves.

4th; here we have report from world bank that around 60% people of India are living with income less than $2.0 per day, as below

here, how is it wise to have high population if you can't give them good life? how is it advisable to have more population this way???

=> [//data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.2DAY?order=wbapi_data_value_2011+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=asc]Poverty headcount ratio at $2 a day (PPP) (% of population) | Data | Table]

5th; Population of India was hardly around 341 million at the time of freedom, in 1947, and we can't have more than 700 million people, and we need a national consensus on it.

and as Overpopulation of India is directly related to consumption of natural resources of the world, high pollution and hence Climate Change due to high consumption of energy. reduced water level has also been caused in India due to the same high population and hence high demand reasons, hence India is directly answerable to the rest of the world about the measures it is adopting to reduce its population to 700 million, say by 2050

we can't let India become one of the reason for the destruction of this world, as the Earth belongs to every person of the world, regardless any nationality

6th; and here, first there is no control on the population, as much as India can have, and on the top of that, they want to feed them for nothing too

=> [//articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-07-09/news/40469205_1_food-security-bill-foodgrain-subsidies]At Rs 1,25,000 cr, Food Security Bill largest in world: Implementation a challenge, says Morgan Stanley - Economic Times]

 

[santosh10]

Re: Sustainable World: Population based on Resource Sufficiency Evalua

Sustainability Calculator

With rising affluence and world population projected to reach 9.3 billion by 2050, can we live sustainably?

Over the past half century, we have made a lot of progress in eliminating poverty, reducing hunger, and improving living conditions, but resources are limited, and humanity's ecological footprint is large"¦and growing. We are already using essential resources, like fresh water, at an unsustainable rate. Will we be able to meet the basic needs of 9.3 billion people in 2050 "¦without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their needs? There is no precise answer to that question, but by some estimates we could need more than 2 Earths by 2050. And that is not sustainable. :ranger:

There are many factors that go into determining whether we can live sustainably. This simplified calculator uses four key variables—population, lifestyles, energy mix, and agricultural productivity—to give us a better understanding of what will be needed to sustain projected population growth in various regions of the world. For purposes of this interactive exercise, the resources required to meet basic human needs are expressed in units of land.

//swinitiative.com/calculator/

//swinitiative.com/calculator/