DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Unergerah** · 07-16-2009, 05:59 AM

Well then it is a chicken or egg questions. What came first?

When we were hunter and gathered we could not afford a large pop because food source was uncertain. With agriculture there was more efficiency. It took less effort/calories to products x calories of food. So we could support a large population

Note that population growth is negative or slow in industrialized countries while pop growth is high in non-industrialized countries. Note that output of industrialized countries often goes to other industrialized countries because they are the once with the $$$. Look at the poor farmers in india and vietnam - many are still living in pre industrial existence with use of draught animals for agriculture.

Basically, industrialized countries are supporting the non-industrialized countries in their current ability to maintain a high population growth. Non-industrialized countries is not an accurate term because most of them today are industrializing and have quite significant amounts of industrializing though not to the state which they believe will bring them affluence. Without it, their population could have grown so much without the Malthus check. Take out the industries in India and Vietnam, they will not be growing as back as they are now. Energy use and the access to it governs population growth significantly. Industrialization allows for more effective energy use and leveraging. Burning crude oil by itself, just does not quite cut it as useful utilization of energy. Humans are but useless 100W (1/7 hp) machines by themselves, but great when they learn how to harness and leverage energy.

Well, industrialization can bring affluence and affluence brings about selfish behavior and the desire to enjoy more for oneself. Others may call it another strategy in survival by having less of supposed better quality offspring. Whichever the flavor, you like.

07-16-2009, 05:59 AM	#15
Unergerah Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 399 Senior Member	Well then it is a chicken or egg questions. What came first? When we were hunter and gathered we could not afford a large pop because food source was uncertain. With agriculture there was more efficiency. It took less effort/calories to products x calories of food. So we could support a large population Note that population growth is negative or slow in industrialized countries while pop growth is high in non-industrialized countries. Note that output of industrialized countries often goes to other industrialized countries because they are the once with the $$$. Look at the poor farmers in india and vietnam - many are still living in pre industrial existence with use of draught animals for agriculture. Basically, industrialized countries are supporting the non-industrialized countries in their current ability to maintain a high population growth. Non-industrialized countries is not an accurate term because most of them today are industrializing and have quite significant amounts of industrializing though not to the state which they believe will bring them affluence. Without it, their population could have grown so much without the Malthus check. Take out the industries in India and Vietnam, they will not be growing as back as they are now. Energy use and the access to it governs population growth significantly. Industrialization allows for more effective energy use and leveraging. Burning crude oil by itself, just does not quite cut it as useful utilization of energy. Humans are but useless 100W (1/7 hp) machines by themselves, but great when they learn how to harness and leverage energy. Well, industrialization can bring affluence and affluence brings about selfish behavior and the desire to enjoy more for oneself. Others may call it another strategy in survival by having less of supposed better quality offspring. Whichever the flavor, you like.
	Quote