Pintmaster

Analysis and expansion of the article by Albert Bartlett: “The World’s Worst Population Problem — (Is There a Population Problem?):”

A 3% to 3.5% growth rate is not only an achievable national objective: it is an economic and social necessity.

[1]

The unwavering desire for growth of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) in developed nations is a disturbing trend that is as much a characteristic of humans as the desire to procreate. Both of these desires are in fact related. The human desire to procreate helps to maintain the ability to increase the GDP. It is a necessary characteristic for survival that a species must replace those who die. Unfortunately, our birth rate as a species is in excess of our mortality rate. With more people needing to be supported, our production of goods must be increased, and thus growth in GDP is experienced. If uncontrolled, population and GDP growth will fuel each other and expedite the self-destruction of the human race. The inability of the world to provide the amount of food and resources needed to maintain current levels of growth will lead to the decline of quality of life for the masses, large social unrest, and most likely the devolution of the human race.

Consumption of goods in western countries, and primarily the United States is far greater than the rest of the world. This is what constitutes overpopulation, not population density. The Netherlands has a population density of 1,031 people per square mile. "The Netherlands can support 1,031 people per square mile only because the rest of the world does not". [2] It is essential to understand that many of the worlds developed nations use developing nations in order to get necessary goods that it is not as profitable for them to produce. This decision is made based on the opportunity cost. For example, the techniques in the Netherlands for making clogs may be far in excess of their ability to grow mangos. In another nation such as the Philippines, they can produce mangos of a greater overall value than the clogs they could produce in a given time, and thus it would be advantageous for both countries to trade and for the Philippines to satisfy their clog demand by buying them from the Netherlands and to provide mangos to satisfy the Netherlands demand. Companies such as the Gap Corporation are able to make low cost, high quality clothes by setting up factories in developing nations. This helps to increase the standard of living in the developing nations but in doing so, the cost of doing business in that nation will slowly increase. With more income per capita in the country, the consumption per individual will increase. This will decrease the amount available for the rest of the world, and it will get to a point where investment in developing nations will allow them to catch up to developed nations and the consumption will increase accordingly also. The total worldwide production will be less than the demand for those products. In the case of food, if there is not enough food to go around, people will die, and negative growth will occur.

The earth has defenses against human growth. Natural disasters, disease, war, global warming, depletion of non-renewable resources are all contributing factors to the stabilization of population and subsequently the stabilization of GDP growth. The desire to increase population also seems to be directly related to the wealth of individuals. Wealth lessens the desire to reproduce. The population of the United States is estimated to double in 115 years, whereas the overall world population will double in 53 years [3] . The GNP (Gross National Product) per capita of the United States is $29,240. The world GNP per capita is $6,300. The United States is looked upon as a model of success. The standard of living in the United States is deemed by many to be the highest in the world. It is the land of opportunity, but that opportunity creates a tremendous strain on our environment.

In the United States, there are 19,674 kg of carbon emissions per capita annually, almost 5 times the World average of 4,157 kg annually. The U.S. has 5% of the world's population, but it consumes 20 million barrels of oil daily, or 26% of the world's total. [4] The more the population of the U.S. grows, the more oil it will consume. This is the same for any non-renewable resource, though oil is the one of immediate concern because of our great dependence on it and the proximity at which some fear it will run out.

The energy that fuels our production processes will also decrease our ability to maintain growth in GDP. Alternatives need to be found in order for the factories to keep working, for the lights to stay on, for our cars to keep running. All of our primary energy sources are non-renewable and our supply of them is decreasing at a faster rate as the world population increases.

Advances in medicine, and technology act in direct opposition to Darwin's theory of survival of the fittest. With air-conditioning, old people are less likely to die in the heat of the summer, and prescription drugs can keep them alive longer when they are sick. We are better able to survive the elements and the nature���s defenses against us. Humans are constantly trying to fight against death and are reluctant to see death as a good thing, but it is. A death rate equal to the rate of birth minus infant mortality is the most desirable current situation for humans. We are accelerating towards a energy dichotomy which we have yet to solve. If we have no idea of how we are going to save our current population when the oil runs out, how can we possibly suggest we would be able to support a population that will most likely be more than double the current population?

What solutions can we possibly have for this dilemma? From a purely economic standpoint, one way to address both the concern of curbing population growth as well as to maintain increases in GDP is by having a world war. During times of war, economies boom and many people are killed. This of course has ethical implications, such as who would or could make the decision to go to war for these purposes. It is most likely that no one will have to. There are many situations that exist where there is instability in clusters of countries. Population increase only intensifies the tension. For example, Israel and Palestine have been disputing land that provides neither state adequate space in the long term when taking population growth into account. They have been able to help curb population increases by killing each other. In recent months, other countries in the Middle East have become concerned with Israel's incursions into Palestine. This situation has the potential to provoke Israel to use its nuclear weapons in "defense". This would not necessarily be a bad thing in the long run. If the people in the dispute were wiped out, then reason for the dispute, overpopulation, would no longer occur. Of course the ethical and environmental implications of this tactic are far greater than the perceived advantages.

There are many things that affect the decision for supporting increased growth in GDP, and too many things to consider accounting for in a short paper. Long term survival of the human race should be one of the major considerations when making decisions but unfortunately this is subordinate to growth. The desire for growth is "like buying a ticket on the Titanic. You can be smart and go first class, or you can be dumb and go steerage. In both cases, the result is the same. But given the choice, most people would go first class". [5] This is a serious issue that most people choose to ignore. People are only focused on achieving a better standard of living for themselves and increasing their personal wealth.�� Those who try to educate about the problem are cast aside because of the implications of what they are saying. It is time that the politicians of the world listened to Albert Bartlett and the other economist/philosophers that share the same grim outlook. This problem is real and ignoring it will not save us from it.

[1] Bartlett, Albert A. "The New Flat Earth Society" Available: http://www.oilcrisis.com/bartlett/flatearth.htm, April 2002

[2] Ehrlich, Paul R. and Anne H. Ehrlich "The Population Explosion" Available: http://www.2think.org/tpe.shtml, April 2002

[3] Zero Population Growth, Inc "The Demographic Facts of Live" Available: http://www.zpg.org/Communications/demfacts.PDF, April 2002

[4] Hodges Michael and Jean Laherr're "Grandfather Economic Energy Report" Available: http://mwhodges.home.att.net/energy/energy.htm, April 2002

[5] Bartlett, Albert A. ���Reflections on Sustainability, Population Growth, and the Environment - Revisited:��� Available: http://www.oilcrisis.com/bartlett/reflections.htm, April 2002