Population decline, not climate change, is an existential threat to the West | Paul Morland
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 апр 2024
- As new census data shows Britain’s demographics changing at historic rates, what does a future Britain look like? Is the world over or underpopulated? And how does fertility impact global power struggles? To answer these questions Steven Edginton is joined by the leading demographer Paul Morland.
=
Subscribe to The Telegraph with our special offer: just £1 for 3 months. Start your free trial now:
www.telegraph.co.uk/customer/...
Get the latest headlines: www.telegraph.co.uk/
Telegraph.co.uk and / telegraphtv are websites of The Telegraph, the UK's best-selling quality daily newspaper providing news and analysis on UK and world events, business, sport, lifestyle and culture.
"Young people have so many more opportunities."
Unless that's owning a home, being paid well, starting a family, etc... all things previous generations enjoyed at much higher proportions.
That has very little to do with this topic in discussion. It’s related to inequality created by the financial model being too extreme in the past decade or two. That’s a real issue but it has nothing to do with population metrics
Inequality has EVERYTHING to do with it.
just move into an abandoned house ...
................what opportunities?
Forty plus years of Neoliberal doctrine , Social Housing sold off , and not replaced, i think we're on the same wavelength.
Honest work doesn't pay
Laziness paid off for black people, I guess. Their population numbers are soaring
Young millennials and Gen z quiet quitting the baby making industry….GLOBALLLY. W 🏆#childfreeZillennial #childfreeMillennials
#childfreeZoomers
Even when the birth rate was enough to keep a growing population we still didn't take care of the retirees
Very much overpopulated.
@Zeno Karlsbach population levels don't actually matter in this issue. On average every person costs the state more than they contribute over a lifetime. Its a system of kicking the can down to the next generation. It genuinely doesn't matter the size of the next generation as they will also just cause the same problem for the next......
taking care of the senio citizens isn't their goal, their goal is to produce more sheep
When the population declines by 20% everyone will be able to own cheap homes. Demand will collapse.
That’s where immigration comes in.
Population decline but yet we see cost of housing rising, umeployment, homelessness etc etc. It needs to decline more.
Immigration must be stopped for it to happen
it will not decline, because proprietors do not want to see the value of their property porfolio decline. if not natural, they will make population grow through immigration from the countries like india, where population growth is still at 30 mill per year, and the housing is cheap and aboundant ($10K for 2 bed flat in hyderabad, last time i checked.)
Unemployment is the lowest its ever been. Homelessness is far more complex than affording a home. Most people are homeless due to mental illness which I blame modern culture and social media mainly. Less people won't solve problems that need smart people to solve.
and the 700k of africans/poor immigrants that come yo UK every year?
@@tiagoalfredo9998 There's only 2 million black people in the UK. Your numbers are not mathing.
We have more than enough food but people still starve in the third world and there are food banks in the first world. Young people can't afford housing, childcare is scarce, and health care is being sucked up by the elderly. I love how this isn't touched on at all.
People starve, because the excess food of the West can not get efficiently to third world. Young people can't afford housing, until restrictions are lifted and condos can be built to suburbs (in the US). Elderly suck up healthcare because their diets and lifestyles lead to diabetes and other disease.
We have the technology and all material requirements are met. We just lack the will to implement it smartly.
It is touched on. The proportion of people starving in the world is the lowest it has been by a long way in all of human existence. More people are dying from eating too much than not enough. Housing costs don’t even correlate that well with fertility rates. The majority of history people had multi generational or even multi family households. Attempts to boost fertility rate with publicly funded childcare have been ineffective.
Saudi Arabia bombs Yemen and the US financing it, at the same time they speak about human rights in Ukraine, democracy and spit other propaganda onto masses.
those are factors of a bad economic system
Maybe the bankers could come up with a solution for how expensive they have made life before banging on about population decline being an Existential threat.
Don't be quite so fekking..... sensible!! oh, right, sorry.
Exactly! Population decline is NOTHING short of an issue; rather a blessing in order to greatly reverse/reduce our destructive behavior. Their only concern is their precious profits, rather than the humans that they exploit.
They'd have to reduce their bloated paychecks and golden parachutes (CEOS etc). That's not gonna happen on a voluntary basis.
Not half as stupid and irrelevant as our godawful President's statment : “The only existential threat humanity faces, even things more frightening than a nuclear war, is global warming,” Biden said
I have not heard one person in several years give a sht about this. Biden with all his money might worry. Coked-up Hunter doens't care. Only clueless science-phobes like our stupid Presdient cares. ... I still remember that whole speech with that fake serious face talking about OMNIcron virus.-- and what did we find out later
South African doctor who discovered Omicron variant SLAMS pressure from countries to make the virus sound worse than it actually is
Dr Angelique Coetzee was one of the first scientists to discover Omicron strain
She said she's been attacked from scientists and politicians around the world
Dr Coetzee said she was told not to describe the Covid variant as 'mild'
Why don't we just improve the lives of our current populations? Instead of producing more corporate slaves that need to live paycheck to paycheck.
That would make to much sense!
We can’t have that, it’s a threat to the rich.
When I was born, we were at about 4 billion people. Now doubled in less than 50 years. Housing pricing and the low availability of it is out of control which is contributing to homelessness, drug addiction, mental health issues on a scale that I’ve never seen before until now and I live in a very small town in the middle of nowhere. Animal species are disappearing at an alarming rate. Garbage is everywhere now. I’ve been to places in the world which had beautiful beaches and forests which are now covered in a mass of garbage. I understand that the lowering of our population is going to be tough going forward, but the alternative is that we wipe out the bottom of our food chain and the whole pyramid collapses if we continue doubling our population every 50 years?
We could fix many of those problems with higher taxes on the wealthy. They have something like 70% of the wealth and 95% of the income. Yet we tax them at the lowest rates.
They only like taxes.
Thanks for speaking some truth
Exactly having more people doesn't mean anything if they were to potentially live worse lives
"Housing pricing and the low availability of it is out of control which is contributing to homelessness, drug addiction, mental health" -- There is no evidence to substantiate this claim.
When I was in UK. I saw empty boarded up streets under a constant grey sky, litter everywhere.
Homeless people sleeping in doorways. Opioid addicts out of their mind and women so drunk they urinated on the streets. It's a sad declined country
They sky was always grey
@@stevejones2310 not when I was young!
@@stevejones2310 Soon it will be black, and the sun might become a myth, if oil companies don't stop.
come to one of your former colonies Canada then
There are pockets in the US that are the same. Lots of reasons, but the main one is because we let it happen and do not make people accountable for their behavior - in fact we encourage bad behavior at a societal level. It's sad.
Declining population is NOT a threat, it’s an opportunity and huge benefit to humanity and earth. It’s inevitable and I look forward to it.
declining population of the germanic race is a disaster
Absolutely, especially when its in the WEST, its an incredible demographic replacement 💕🔥
I agree, we must stop imporzing foreigners so we don't grow our population
I agree. Where in the history books is it written that "the population of the working class got bigger and bigger and everything turned out fine"
incredible demographic replacement? Mind clarify @@myrnaa9517
It’s hilarious to me how little intelligent, free thinking, older people fail to see the overwhelmingly deleterious effects that technology has had on my generation.
Nothing but rows and rows of soulless, anxiety ridden people; minds that are zapped of authentic emotion and self discipline. Social media has completely unwound centuries of communication within 20 years.
Interesting, what is your generation doing to reverse adverse impacts?
I think the positive effects outweigh the negatives, but of course there are major negatives that should be acknowledged and addressed.
@@TheHeavyModd "I think the positive effects outweigh the negatives" -- Please provide the evidence to support this statement.
It’s not the technology itself, it’s the advertisement, greed, and irresponsibility that deploys it. There are no limits hence very little human care. Just business as usual.
The world is so overpopulated from a standard of living & environmental perspective but completely underpopulated from a capitalist market perspective.
The economy is a construct, a total fiction. Geophysics and biochemistry are hard limits in the real world. The economy should be the last consideration, but the people in charge are doing the opposite. It’s a nightmare.
Exactly. The shareholders need more workers undercutting each other so they can maximize the dividends they extract.
Well said. If we look at times and places where there were labour shortages the living standards and income of the labour force increases. The best example is the end of serfdom in England post the bubonic plague.
Capitalism as a system requires more and more people, gobbling up the earth's resources at a faster and faster rate.
So true!
If everyone lived like an average American, we would need 4.1 times more land than we currently have. Source: BBC, 16 Jun 2015, "How many Earths do we need?"
Good thing the BBC isn't a scientific body.
(The GFN is not widely accepted either).
I heard Americans in coasts pollute like average European but in inner USA they pollute much more since they have single homes and use less public transport.
@@konyvnyelv. Wikipedia has a page "List of U.S. states and territories by carbon dioxide emissions"
More babies more money for the rich so they could put them to work when they grow up
The BBC should not exist
All I know is, I wasn’t supposed to be here.
This world is not built for the poor.
Thats it my man. I feel this so hard :(
oh yes it was - youre just not the benefactor of it - the rich are
There is a fundamental flaw in the statement that immigration is necessary to solve worker shortages. It only describes immigrants as producers of labor and not consumers of labor. Immigrants want housing, transportation, food, garbage collection, medical care, etc., too. These products and services cost labor to produce, and if immigrants consume more labor that way than they produce, with welfare programs supplying the money difference, then immigration will worsen labor shortages instead of solving them.
IMMIGRATION SHOULD BE CONTROLLED!
Shhh don’t say that, the British plebs aren’t supposed to know they are being lied to, manipulated and brainwashed
overall immigrations good for capitalism - it produces growth which capitalism is addicted to - we in nz rely on it - weve had 50,000 immigration policy from 1999 to 2008 then its been around 100,000 since except for the covid years . This in turn created a housing crisis worsened by covid.
in NZ farmers dont pay enough so not enough kiwis work there - its filled by immigration - for NZ farming immigration works cause they get cheap labour - in some cases illegal under min wage labour.
But youre saying it puts the burden on other industries like housing - exactly as commented below - i hadnt thought about other factors - power transport and food - prices have gone up but thats mostly do with money printing in covid.
Perhaps its like population growth -it gets older and less young to support so need new people aka immigration they grow up and need more immigration to support them
immigration produces growth and requires more immigration as economy grows certainly seems to be the mantra of business world and politicians here
Less people is better. Less traffic, less environmental damage, less air pollution, the list goes on.
Higher wages and resources. But this should happen to all countries not only West otherwise it's replacement
@@konyvnyelv. Not happening West has passed it's booming phase. Not all nations will have same population pyramid.
Or people make more sustainable choices ?
@@ekcs3941 Even if everyone consumed less the footprint is still too large., plus the trend is to use more not less resources. EVs are great but still require massive amounts of fossil fuel.
@@amraceway Im talking walking public transport, bikes etc etc not cars
funny how car centric we are
I missed any mention of fossil fuels becoming scarcer and more expensive and how food production is dependent on fossil energy, the uneven distribution of wealth and resources within and between countries and how this creates migration pressure, and how education and aspirations affect the choice to conceive or not, and what might happen if reach a tipping point in climate change. The good doctor was also far too dismissive of technology and how this could affect productivity ( I wondered of he was thinking that more people are required to make each other cups of coffee). I can confidently predict he hasn't the faintest clue what future technology developments will be and how they will affect us. I guess that spouting confidently helps him sell books (but not to me)
Scarcity and expense are ALWAYS opportunities for innovation and growth of alternative technologies. It's not mentioned, because the solutions will emerge organically; but only if a sufficient population is maintained to produce enough innovators on the far right end of the bell curve.
So the earth is not overpopulated. Did that guy drink lacquer?
Earth Overshoot Day (EOD) is the calculated illustrative calendar date on which humanity's resource consumption for the year exceeds Earth’s capacity to regenerate those resources that year. Last year Earth Overshoot Day fell on 28 July.
For them as long as tax is paid its not overpopulation.
No, it is not overpopulated. Most people don't use too many resources. It's the shrinking populations that use up most resources. Human beings have vastly different individual resource consumptions. The increase in individual resource consumption in the shrinking populations overcompensate the reduction in size.
My state has millions of trees. Oil reserves globally are huge.
Fertility rates although higher in 3rd world countries they have been declining as well. It is a world wide phenomena.
Social enginering is fenomen?
not quite - india is still reproducing at the speed of 30mil per year, and they have cheap and abboundant housing.
Human beings are sick and tired of the earth going down the same negative destructive path, we are sick of Injustice we are sick of war and we want peace, or we will stop having babies, and that is what is happening we are sick and tired of being sick and tired, either things change or we will change it by not continuing on.
Haven't heard the term 'world-wide-web' in more than a decade.
On almost all big issues like this we tend to discount physical causes in favour of cultural causes. I’m not insisting there are physical causes behind reduced fertility, but we should at least consider them as part of the mix. We know that sperm counts have declined by around 50% since the 1970s. This is probably due to pesticides, endocrine disruptors, and the chemicals used in plastics. Rising obesity caused by poor diet may also be reducing libido in both men and women.
I’m not saying that raising sperm counts back to 1970s levels will lead to everyone having replacement fertility again. But I’d be surprised if sperm count decline is a total nothingburger.
Pollution is also a contributing factor to human fertility.
The correlation between obesity and childbearing is generally positive. It's the educated urbanites who are much more likely to be thin that are least likely to have replacement-level fertility. Likewise, cities with higher latino populations (higher obesity) have the highest birth rates.
Cars don't help. People drive everywhere for everything - obesity, poverty, lack of interaction, pollution are some of the negative effects of car-dependency
The daily Lie of human excuses makes a difference. Leadership is so totally dishonest at this point. Where is any reason for good faith?
@@Life_as_Gamenow I will say this, Japan is a country where people mostly walk and their birth rates have hit the floor. They’re also the healthiest and longest living people on the planet. Now I’m not saying they don’t have their own fair share of pollution cause they do, but health wise, they’re the top people in the account…
Love how this convo never includes nature or animals.
👍✌️❤️
🐕🐴🦁
The problem is crowding and food distribution.
👎 the world is on an unsustainable course - human caused.
A planet with less idiots can not be a bad thing. Their problem is power and money.
unfortunately his pea brains focused on breeding so it wont be him. lol
The population of Africa increased by TEN FOLD in HALF A CENTURY!
The meek shall inherit the earth.
Look in your bible.
Yes, but the estimates are already being lowered.
@@GUITARTIME2024 “Estimates”? The ten fold increase is not an estimate.
@Balkan Mode I mean future projections. They are already being lowered somewhat, but yes, Africa will a huge chunk of global growth until 2100.
@@GUITARTIME2024 The good news is by 2100 AI will be in the process of culling this semi-intelligent species regardless whether they descend from a group with an average IQ of 85 or a group with an average IQ of 115. That would solve the “climate change” and other problems for planet Earth.
Population decline is a threat to relentless consumer Capitalism which requires growth at all costs.
How about the standard of living of the ones getting old since there is no young people to work anymore?
Where are the female voices in these conversations? Seriously. 🤯
It's no wonder your western population is on the decline due to Liberalism and Fem ideologies entitlement 😂
I missed the part where that's my problem 😂
i liked your comment
And its not directly but reading between lines hes a capitalist shill and trying prevent capitalism collapse which will eventually happen. Then if youre young it means prob no job , if still alive and old it will mean no pension
Population reduction is an issue because most economies are built on a "pyramidal structure", where the youth support the older generations. This needs to be addressed, regardless of other issues - there must be a way to get each generation into a "self sustaining" mode.
Seen on a holistic level, I would suggest population stagnation or actual decline is a positive, as from a pragmatic standpoint it reduces the burden that people place on the entire ecosystem of the Earth. The big aspect of this is HOW population decline occurs, and the bigger part of that is what groups (racial, economic, etc.) are either those in decline or in accent.
Are the Western societies going to accept increases in Asian, African, and Middle Eastern populations while theirs shrink? Or are we already seeing the stress that puts into society with the rise of White Nationalism? Which societies should succeed - those with advanced technology and economies, or those that simply have the highest birth rates?
The highest birthrates will triumph as they are the beneficiaries of the knowledge, as he says, so their societies will prosper and increase their populations! This will create new militant leaders wanting to advance their county's territory and with modern arms will create more warfare like the current one in Ukraine.
White Nationalists wouldn't & don't begrudge the growth of other nations, peoples and countries where they did & do so without endangering their own - most want a sustainable diversity of different human populations rather than the destructive churn we currently have under the current globalistion.
Yes, the answer to that is to only push increases in longevity if people can be productive for large parts of that longevity. Pushing longevity only to have people bed-ridden and propped up by drugs and waited on hand and foot by youth seems an absurd waste of resources. We should be looking for human performance enhancement throughout the 40s, 50s, and 60s, to make people more vital and able to contribute more to society rather than maximum lifespans.
The only way to get each generation in 'self-sustaining mode' is for the over-65s to start paying a great deal more for their cost of living, either by receiving less public help through free healthcare systems and state pensions, or by liquidating the assets they have accumulated in the form of savings and housing. Try selling that argument to the people who are already retired, to the baby boomers who are beginning to retire, and to generation X who can now see retirement appearing on the horizon.
@@dancahill9585 Which is precisely what Macron in France is trying to do: increase the retirement age and keep people in the labour market for longer. Politically it isn't going very well. Employers also need to change their attitude towards older employees and not discard every resume or cv sent by a job applicant on the wrong side of 50 or 55 as 'too old'. We can crank up the minimum retirement age as much as we want, and in a lot of European countries the rate is already over 65. But that's not much help to the sustainability of the social security system if employers refuse to employ people in their late 50s or 60s.
u look at the demographics in england and the population 30 yrs ago we were have the size double the englishmen and twice as successful look at england now we cant even call this place england anymore infact i got corrected the other day by a taxi driver saying hes from the uk not england ........ tragic
Absolutely spot on. A maysian of Indian origin arrived at Heathrow and got into a taxi driven by a Sikh. The Malaysian guy asked him if this was the United Kingdom. He thought he had got on a wrong flight!!!
bahahaahah get fooked nigel.
@agnescraig2912
Absolutely spot on. A man of Indian origin arrived at Switzerland and saw an english man talking on the phone. The Indian guy asked him if this was Switzerland. He thought he had got on a wrong flight!!!
Maybe England shouldn't have colonized so many countries...
@BrianT It has everything to do with British Empire.
For the British ruling Elite, whose bottoms the British peasants have been kissing for centuries, immigrants are a better investment in labour than the native population.
Immigrants work harder than the Natives, create more wealth, are more loyal to the Elites and support the ruling British class. On the contrary, the Native British are entitled, lazy and are more interested in handouts. Natives can also be a threat to the Elite power structure.
This is why the British Elite encourages immigration to maintain their power structure and wealth. Immigrants not only serve as a buffer for protection of British Elite but can also be used as boogeyman to distract the natives. Meanwhile the Elites continue to operate behind the scenes and live a life of luxury as they have been doing for centuries.
not for the rest of the world, maybe for a couple of million people in Europe.
If quantity wins over quality everybody loses.
Best of all possible worlds, Dr Pangloss!
The million immigrants a year are a factor in discouraging family formation. Migrants crowd up infrastructure that they didn't pay for, and they contribute to the need for still more infrastructure that everyone has to pay for, not just the newcomers that make it necessary.
Of course, the construction companies just love their taxpayer-funded projects, as do their employees, many of them foreign.
and in the future the mass migration from areas of the world that become uninhabitable due to deafforestation and climate change will make this problem many times more accute.
Crowd up infrastructure? Blame immigrants and government for everything, but never take responsibility for anything. Please feel discouraged from forming a family. For the love of god, do not reproduce.
@@Ali-ps8rm Those places shouldn't be doubling their populations so many times each century then. Seems like they don't have much interest in eating.
Uh, the world is not deforesting at all. Its actually rapidly regreening due to rising levels of CO2. The Saraha is shrinking quickly for example, and the US has more forest area than when Europeans first arrived. The world has been much hotter than it is many times during its history and was far more lush than it is now. Think dinosaur era.
Also, I doubt very much that AI or their owners will be making up the taxes that humans would have been forced to pay
This guy was educated in politics and demographics, and his opinion on those subjects is worth listening to.
His opinion on climate, technological progress, and social science is not worth a bolt... He is a layman in these areas.
Regardless of his background, his main thesis, that population decline is a crisis, is completely off the mark. Population decline is a good thing for humans, and for every other species on Earth (he conveniently forgets that there are other species living on our planet). And climate change really is a crisis. He's peddling a load of crap.
I haven't watched the video, but I would have to agree with the criticisms just based on the headline. Environmental decline is a bigger problem than demographics because it's at the heart of infertility rates and sperm counts plummeting across the masses (declining food supply quality, decrease in nutrition, increase in toxins).
Politics is the biggest issue overall, since governments are failing in their jobs to curb overpopulation and declining environments in favor of economics. There are clear cut failures in regulation across the board world wide and soft/hard corruption is at the root.
What I find most common in relation to climate change, is the failure to factor in what follows an Arctic void of sea ice during summer. We came perilously close to a blue ocean event following the super El Nino of 2016 through to 2020. We've had 2.5 years of La Nina and are just coming out of it now. Another stretch or two of El Nino's and the world may learn the hard way what happens when the Arctic cap is no longer there to cool off the Northern hemisphere during the summer months. This may occur in this decade.
I simply find that anyone who downplays the risks of climate change simply hasn't thought it through. The world is still highly reliant on hydrocarbons with consumption yet to find it's peak. We will hit thresh environmental holds in this decade, I believe. This is not a long term problem, it's on our doorstep now.
See the greater factor of addressing the issue immigration is the attitudes of the social attitudes of the Oxbridge civil servants.
Your grasp of the English language is very poor
It’s funny, no one ever talks about the end game of the endless growth economic model. The world can only sustain so many people. Countries need to adopt to this decline now, before we have massive overpopulation, resources depletion, AND the problems with population decline.
More than 100 years have passed and they still have Malthusians who think there is overpopulation, it is incredible how durable this ideology is, it is not enough for them to sterilize people in the third world
Before we? We're already there, have been for a long time.
So Africa and the Middle East gets to triple even quadruple their populations in the last 50 years. Meanwhile, Europe has like a 50% increase but somehow has to suffer all the effects of the 3rd world breeders. The world really needs more Europeans, native Europeans.
Why is it so important to fill this labour shortage? Labour shortages create a buyers market for work and so wages would go up to try and draw people in which is better for everyone.
but its bad for capitalists and the economy and politicians are geared to maintaining its profits
What are people going to do if every office job can soon be replaced by some GPT model? No need for additional brilliant brains that are nothing in contrast to AGI.
Bah, who wants to live in a world where production is all from robots and all the people are lawyers or in the government to make life ever more infuriatingly complex and pointless?
I guess we can all become artisans and relearn how to do stuff with our hands. Bit of a waste of resources for all those people who spent years and very considerable financial costs acquiring advanced knowledge skills, only to find themselves put out of work by an AI.
@@baltasarnoreno5973 Yeah, I'm eyeing a skilled trade that would fit me.
gtp is merely the summation of humans past thoughts and words
@@malcolmfreeman7802 Google is summation... this takes the summation and right now it is good enough to transform it into output good enough for most jobs. I'm not even talking about the fact that it's exponentially improving.
When farmers plough their crops into the ground because it's not viable to pick them makes a joke of over population.
It makes a joke of the commodities exchange.
They are not ploughing crops into the ground in the fast-breeding countries.
Makes a joke of capitalism.
There is a massive famine in Yemen and according the the USDA around %10 of US households or 13.2 million households are food insecure.
thats only in western capitalist countries mostly and while true does not take into account either the unsustainabile unhealthy nature of food consumed nor other problems associated with overpopulation
thanks for praising me in your show glad i matters to uk
the opening statement is ridiculous. it implies it's ok to fill every bit of space with suburbs. the rest of the interview is great
I do find the interviewee to be rather full of himself. He gives the impression that nothing of significance has ever gone wrong in his life, and he appears to ascribe his reality to everyone else.
I agree with your impression...but he cant be blamed for that...what he had to say counts and that was informative and insightful..
If we are to stop species dying then the world population expansion should be addressed.
If we want to stop an impetus for immigration to industrialized countries then we need to support other nations not to buy imported products to the extent that their economies are depleted. All nations can be enabled to succeed so that we all do similarly well.
Yeah, but the real problem to that is: cultural tensions.
Hostile immigrants are also part of the problem.
I’m not sure I agree with the premise that “population decline” is an existential threat. It seems to me that nuclear war (especially with the world the way it is right now) is far more of an existential threat, along with extreme weather events, and loss of biodiversity. Scientist say we are in the midst of the 6th great extinction event, and our oceans are dying, etc.
haha, many of those scientists are speculators, it's like the doomsday clock
@@kst2154Just like this guy on population.
It's another nail in the coffin of world stability in terms of demographics but it is not a existential threat like losing the earth to all human inhabitants on an inhospitable planet. populations can rebound in a generation, eco system recovery can take centuries or perhaps not at all.
It’s so fascinating to me how many people see this as a crisis, simply because we’ve not seen it before.
It's a cycle. The population will decline until we are no longer a strain on the resources of the planet and then another baby boom will happen
So..like climate change then..?
I want this threat to keep happening
No threats should be allowed ever
What exactly is bad about the suburbs emptying out?
Cheap homes? How is that bad for me?
That, was, fascinating.
There are 3 billion to many humans....... We have a way to go.
By what metric we can easily feed 10 Billion as it is, a few less Envro fundamentalists would be nice
Population decline is a gift to the planet. To say it's an existential threat is ridiculous. There are more people on the planer then ever in recorded history. And worl popu0ation continues to rise. Theoretically it will fall, but with 7 billion + people we are a long way from zero
When they were speaking about the fertility rate, it seemed to me that they were actually referring to the birth rate.
low fertility means low birth rate so id say its both
So very interesting - great interview
Its about time that the animals have more space to live in. People are selfish creatures who only think off themselves.
The only reason population growth is important is because of Capitalism is based on growth. But the earth has both a limited space and a limited amount of resources to make things with. It could come much quicker than we think as we think and live in linear fashion but the world moves forward exponentially. Predicting the future is impossible because things that are improbable or unrelated to our current choices of expertise make it all redundant. In 1800 predicting how much life will change when everyone has a horse and carriage by the year 2000 would be highly incorrect, lol.
Agreed. Capitalism as a system, requires more and more people gobbling up the earth's resources at faster and faster rates.
Businesses want as many migrants as they can get. Migrants are customers. More people competing for the opportunity to earn a living, keep wages down and profits up.
AI scientist tegmark called this moloch problem... ie when we work in bigger system and trend is clear, either we loose job, company goes bust or we try to outcompete rival company and be first to do that trend better.
Are climate activists, to now promote a Logan’s Run future.
@@MrSandancer Why would they? We just need all the world to do what most of us are already doing: making fewer babies.
Capitalism is based on the ability for everyone have private property not growth.
when I went to school in the 90s, the narrative was of threat from global over population.
Idiocracy.
A key point that gets missed is that the green revolution on which we depend to feed everyone is totally dependent on energy and fossil fuel inputs. Particularly the energy inputs to manufacture fertilizers, irrigate and power farm machinery.
At this stage it is not clear how this will be handled in a post green house gas world.
We can’t live sustainably with the current level of human population
Quite right. Individual nations have a serious demographic problem, but total human population is showing no signs of shrinking. But the total human population is causing serious resource depletion, ecological destruction, deforestation, mass extinction of other species, and potentially devastating climate change.
Japan has a severe demographic problem because the culture is hostile to immigrants. Similar in Korea. Other shrinking nations are just bad places to live (e.g., China, Russia).
wrong
listening to this interview I would like to know why there are so many people in the developing who are hungry, thirsty and have a miserable existence. Have first hand experience of a miserable existence. Machines have made a lot of mundane jobs redundant. Thank goodness
@@albertvanlingen7590 Technically we could but we are too lazy, greedy and corrupt overall
@stevec7923 This is not correct. The world's population and growth rate is rapidly slowing - easy to find graphs on this. It's median age is also rising rapidly as fewer young people relative to old ones. It only continues to grow bc of momentum and within the next few decades it will peak and then begin to fall faster and faster. We will probably never see 10 billion and within 100 years if current trends hold it will be back below 7 billion and falling. All of European and more and more Asian nations are already below replacement; China is already losing more than 20,000 people a DAY and will likely shrink by >500,000,000 people by 2100. Anglosphere is also at that tipping point. Latin American nations are also slowing rapidly. There are absolutely benefits to this of course, but it also presents massive challenges that we are not even beginning to plan for. Of course.
Nice ballanced lecture/interview,thanks
the speaker does not recognize the fact that technology will eliminate jobs, there will be bus drivers, (their favorite the market will solve it) by the supply demand curve once salaries have risen to a sufficient level people will choose to be drivers instead of giving out burgers or doing plastic nails. The service sector has large reserves of workforce that, -let's be honest- is currently employed by luxury services that can be easily eliminated
We reached 7 Billion in 2011. 11 years latter 8 Billion. Madness! Nigeria increases 5 M every year, Pakistan 4 M, Bangladesh 2M. Close borders and protect Europeans. No Water, No wild life. Crazy
And it's going to take more than 20 years for 9 billion
Paul Morland uses his own family circumstances to view the rest of the world. I find this depressing. I even imagine a sense of smugness😢
This is a man who knows demographics but is absolutely clueless when it comes to ethics. Or ecology for that matter.
yah, as if everyone just can magic wand take money and status out of wall and somehow implied "faulty", weird, people who cannot do it. Well everyone has this problem, just it is more dangerous the higher status and decision power person has.
@@EJS1972 i want to add that I did benefit from the interview. I also was entertained by the British accents. I am definitely receptive to a courteous, thoughtful presentation by “ an influencer” of my generation
@@IusedtohaveausernameIliked "This is a man who knows demographics but is absolutely clueless when it comes to ethics"
A politician, in other words.
The guy is clueless. 'People eat better food'. Do they now? That explains the terrible levels of obesity then...
How to establish pro-natal policies: make marriage a commitment again.
In several states here in America, “no-fault divorce” has made divorce so easy that men have no incentive to marry in the first place.
There's 8 billion humans on the planet. And still growing, population decline is not a problem.
Look at what the data says. Don't be daft.
The issue is not about feeding or space it is about diversity of opinion especially in democratic countries. The greater the population the harder it is to get a consensus of opinion and a stable government.
that is false, democracy is a tambourine that controls the people whether they are 2 million or 200
The greater the population is the less freedom for everyone.
In Japan the ethnicity issue is the maintenance of the cultural ways. A person from mars would be accepted if they demonstrate a support for the cultural characteristics
For Japan's small land size I think 125 million people is overpopulated.
@@Crashed131963 Japan is not small
Correct yourself. Just search how big it is
Japan is massive
@@TheMagicJIZZ Im from Canada , Japan is tiny to me .
Thet US is 26x larger than Japan and only has a population 3.5 X larger.
Nobody calls the US underpopulated.
@@TheMagicJIZZ A lot of Japan is too mountainous to be habitable. Great for forests, though. Plenty of wood for houses.
@@TheMagicJIZZ With 75% mountainous and wooded area.
Correction, BOTH of those are existental threat to the entire world.
How on earth would be threatening the re-wilding of territories and the growth of the forests? Can't we build an economy based on savings instead of production, over-production and growth? In all our history "economy = savings" it has been only during neoliberal period when economy = growth 📈
Doesn't Moreland speak from some kind of lofty entitled position. The falling birthrate is a response to overcrowding in the world and pressure on resources. The economic hand wringing coming from the falling birthrate is a side effect of a demographic transition in which the population tries to adjust itself to a more sustainable model. Just as there was no way to predict that the birthrate would fall so precipitiously, there is no way to predict that birthrates would not rise when the population falls back to 2 Billion as at the beginning of the twentieth century.
The narrative of overpopulation goes way back, decades even. The problem is not so much too many people, but how resources are used and allocated. Pandemics, trends, changes in climate will have the effect expected on population, but octomom's and 19 going on 20, are anomalies in society. I don't buy the climate change narrative splashed on us today, no more than I buy the covid narrative of draconian approaches to masking and forcing jabs. I believe the truth of the matter on many of the issues, including population, is somewhere toward the middle of the arguments of opposing sides.
Don't need worry about population decline, got a ton of boomers in their late years and all the sugar/poor food/bad medicine is killing the rest of us.
The Telegraph and similar papers have spent decades demonising single mums, teen mums, and supporting policies such as the bedroom tax and social housing sales.
that was cheery..
Young millennials and Gen z quiet quitting the baby making industry….GLOBALLLY. W 🏆#childfreeZillennial #childfreeMillennials
#childfreeZoomers
The interviewee is far too reliant on a solution that hasn't been found yet for climate change and extensive pollution, which is going to reduce the carrying capacity of the planet in the not too distant future. We could really do to find an economic system that doesn't rely on continuous growth in a finite system.
Whats the point of stoping cliamite change if there are no humans
@@theamazing2435 I don't understand your question. There are humans: there will be humans for a long time. Should we just leave future generations to suffer because we're too apathetic or lazy to try and act now?
Oh come on, I don't think I'm the only one getting tired of hearing the scare stories about too many people.
When there is overpopulation of any species there are problems associated with that.
Where are the problems of too many people making themselves apparent ? More people are living longer now than ever before, more people are better fed. More people have access to clean water and medicine than ever. More people are better educated than before.
How are these factors supposed to act as proof of there being too many people, if anything, we have managed to mitigate any problems by making them positives, probably through improvements in communication and sharing resources and knowledge more readily
As population declines fewer people exist to consume, and therefore pollute, and therefore quite naturally any manmade 'problems' decline proportionally with the decline in the number of people
@@chrisbarron5861 The global population isn't declining. It is growing.
We have two existential threats, the solutions to both contradict each other...
lol
and both driven by capitalisms need for growth
this interviewer makes my skin crawl everytime I watch him
The world is still overpopulated. The fertility of arable land is declining. The fish stocks of the oceans are declining.
We are losing other species of animals, and we are still losing our forests. So all those extra brains aren't helping.
Paul Erlich was right. If the population didn't explode, it was because his warnings were heeded.
Say that to Africa
@@Groove838 To the Africans in Africa, or to the Africans who are invading Europe because they can't make a living in Africa?
Population decline is the best possible thing that can happen for the human race. I am so hopeful it will slowly decline to a sustainable number.
6,6 billion people is too much
Nonsense. Population will peak at 12 billion and there is nothing to suggest we can not sustain that number. Once peaked it will decline.
If trends continue, it may very well not hit 10 billion before it begins to shrink. Demographers think 10.4 bn but keep adjusting the estimates down as BRs continue to drop around the world. May be back down to 7 bn within 100 years and falling rapidly.
Sounds good Max. Want to get the decline started and do the honourable thing?
@@alexy8520 no, low-quality people in impoverished and stupid people in rich countries should be driven to off themselves soylent green style. it is the quality of the rest of humans that is important. with the arrival of ai taking away a lot of jobs, they will be no need for a lot of idiotic barely mid - level humans.
I completely and vehemently disagree with Paul Morland. In my honest opinion, population decline is a GOOD THING. Even significant population decline is a good thing. Too many humans only think in terms of humans. The thought process always seems to go: "how many humans can the Earth sustain", as if the Earth is our private play-thing, but that isn't the whole picture. We share this planet with many other species and they are going extinct at alarming rates because there are way too many people consuming way too much stuff. Even us humans would be better off if there were fewer of us living on a more balanced planet. Population decline is NOT a crisis, climate change IS. I want humans to flourish too but we can do so with a lot fewer of us. We'd all be better off if there were fewer of us. We're not going to cease to exist as a species, we just need to reduce our population and not be worried about that.
I respectfully disagree. We can easily maintain current and peak population. As economies develop birth rates reduce as does carbon use. Solution is to boost development across the globe.
I completely agree. The looming climate catastrophe and ongoing mass extinction are hardly mentioned, never mind considered.
It can be challenging to distinguish between political influences and genuine evidence. While I believe that overpopulation is not a pressing issue, as the global population is generally decreasing, it doesn't negate the need for proactive measures. Both perspectives can coexist, although this viewpoint may not be widely embraced in the political sphere. It's much easier to see the world as black and white, lol.
@@QuercusQuest This isn't about politics, it's about biology. In the wild when animal or plant populations get too large some disease, or predation, or some other mechanism comes along to trim back the population to a sustainable size. Humans have short circuited this by preventing disease, eliminating all threats, and doing nothing to keep our population at a reasonable level. There are simply too many human beings on planet Earth from a biological perspective. Other species are suffering terribly and many are going extinct as a result. And furthermore many humans suffer from malnutrition or starvation because there are too many mouths to feed despite massive industrial agriculture. And all this massive industrial agriculture is polluting the planet terribly. It's not sustainable as it is, nevermind with more population. It's not ethical to advocate destroying more animal habitat to grow more food for humans, we need to reduce human population back to a sustainable level instead, so that a diversity of life can live in a healthy way on this beautiful planet.
Do your part and reduce your carbon footprint, the world will be better off, no?
Thanks.
31:00 He says the complexion of the country changing to look like the cities spreading everywhere is uncontraversial ... not so if people are honest.
Both are existential threats.
Biggest existential threat is, people like that in power.
why do we need more people on earth?? this gentleman has not lived in india and thats why he cant understand what is population.
8 billion people in world . save earth . save climate
“Population decline, not climate change, is an existential threat to the West…” True, true, true!
Advances in robotics and AI can compensate for a lack of health care workers for an elderly population. Being old in the UK, Europe, or the US is worse than being old in China or any Asian nation. Seniors are treated very badly and looked down upon in western nations and even beaten in nursing homes. Many Swiss and British seniors retire to South East Asian countries to flee abuse. In addition, young people in China and East Asia do not have the rage filled self-destructive culture of the US and Europe.
However, it is over-populated ecologically by a factor of 10 to 100 or more.
hahahahhaha
A decrease in population means increase in per capita GDP as automation and AI fill in for the missing workers. Quality of life goes up. Polution, starvation, and wars go down. Corporations have reduced profits from fewer consumers, governments have less tax revenue, but less revenue is needed. People are retiring later and being productive longer with longer lives such that the old formulas that say we need so many workers to support so many old people is simply not reliable anymore.
The world is dramatically overpopulated
It’s not an either/or situation. Climate change AT THE LEAST will cause geopolitical chaos. Just look at what caused the Arab spring when we had successive wheat harvest failures.
Climate change has been a danger to crops and fisheries over here, due to having more floods, and more seasons of drought.
Work is easier to find and keep now. I'm able to take days off without being punished by my employer (crappy schedules, shittier assignments, etc). It seems to me like the people who are most at risk of retirees and people at the top. Not really changing the lifestyle of the people at the top, just a loss in power
However I am very interested in this topic as well as my advanced English learners are interested in this topic
Am I wearing too much make-up? - No, there are still so many patches of your skin without make-up. Keep piling on!
Well said! 👍
I look forward to a future in which the human population flourishes at a stable level of between 2 and 4 billion, with no poverty, and no billionaires. That would allow civilization and wilderness to coexist. We can get there by some time in the 2200’s. Fertility will recover as population declines.
Why no billionaires?
Imagine thinking the angle of the earth at various times throughout it's lifecycle is humans fault lol
And then letting politicians and CEOs play u like a fiddle to get ur money and compliance over it lol
So what if the population declines, was the 1950s levels so dire? It's about quality over quantity.
I am going watch the full interview but I would like to ask what the main points of the video are and what do these guys think about the decrease do they think it's a problem or not.
Looks like nobody gave in to your laziness huh?
@@MrSvenovitch it's been a month I don't this bro
i stopped at 20 min but hes a dishonest capitalist shill by looks.
The only thing population degrowth is bad for is capitalism ie rich people