Well, first off, the idea of overpopulation is not accurate because, really, the entire population of the world, if they were stretched shoulder to shoulder, could fit within the city limits of Jacksonville.
~ Michelle Duggar, famed mother of the 19 Kids and Counting TV series via US Weekly, March 30
[Photo via Style Flavors; HT: Laura Loo]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I don’t like Michelle Duggar. She appears to be addicted to pregnancy and it seems like the children are being raised by each other rather than by their parents.
However, she has a point about the whole “overpopulation” concern. Is there any magic number that is the “right” human population for this planet?
If you have not already seen it, this is a great site to get some facts about our population.
http://overpopulationisamyth.com/
More on world population fitting into Jacksonville: http://www.tennesseerighttolife.org/human_life_issues/human_life_issues_over-population_myths.htm
I still don’t understand how ANYONE could think the world is overpopulated…
Do they think elderly people live FOREVER???
Pamela, it’s because “6 billion” is a biiiig roooounnnd nuuummmber and people are afraid of biiiig roooouuund nummmmbbberrs! ;) (yes, I know we’re over 6 billion now but that’s when all this really seemed to start making real headway with the average person as opposed to just the activists, who have literally been screaming overpopulation for a couple hundred years now)
Seriously though, it’s usually for one of two reasons, 1) they believe the anti-human propaganda activists who are far more interested in destroying human life than anything else or 2) they don’t understand the difference between a population problem (which we don’t have) and a distrubution problem (which we do have).
There certainly aren’t too many lovely folks like the Duggars. That is for sure.
Those who decry “too many people” usually live in big cities and face highway congestion and long commutes. If you’ve ever driven from Fargo, ND, to Rapid City SD, in the middle of winter, you wouldn’t think there are too many people.
Amen! Overpopulation is a little ridiculous. My husband had a lively debate with a young man in Pittsburgh about overpopulation. And then, a few months later, Hubby and I flew to Wyoming. Seeing those miles upon miles of uninhabited land caused the utter ridiculousness of the argument that we have a population problem really hit us.
Do they realize how much space there is?
And anyway, the other side’s mantra about “too many people” only highlights an incredibly fundamental difference between us and them. We believe that people possess intrinsic value and that individuals add something to society.
They believe people are burdens on the world and society has to take care of them. That is the difference and that is why the overpopulation myth gets under my skin.
It’s amazing that the population myth grew such legs when it was based on shoddy math and shoddier science.
Yes, distribution of resources is our problem. I still remember donating to LiveAid and having our food rot in trucks without being delivered. (If that’s even true. That’s what the media reported at the time.)
Amazingly, overpopulation enthusiasts are always willing to kill someone else to solve their mythical ‘problem.’ If we did have a population problem, which we don’t, it would be a great reason NOT to cut NASA’s budget. But I guess Obama doesn’t have a problem with Japan (or someone else) beating us to Mars. I’d like the nations to work together on the project, but if the US team is hobbled by budget cuts, we’ll be sitting on the sidelines of history.
LibertyBelle,
No, they do not realize how much space there is. They are naive liberal city kids who think suburbia is “rural”.
I don’t think most people who worry about overpopulation think that we literally don’t have enough space. I think they worry about running out of resources. Fossil fuels is a big concern of theirs.
Jack, yes, that is part of their concern, yes. I’ve actually heard them mention not enough space though. And anyway, that still doesn’t solve the problem that their answer to supposed overpopulation is to allow for abortions and/or euthanasia.
There are some things that need to be cleared up about the term “overpopulation.” Overpopulation doesn’t refer to how much space that we’re able to apportion to our respective “bubbles.” When people use the term overpopulation, they’re referring to the toll that a large population can take on the globe’s resources. We will be overpopulated when the demand on resources succeeds the availability of resources, not when we are relegated to standing room only. Some environmentalists consider unchecked urban sprawl a second definition of overpopulation; I think that there are flaws with this argument, but what’s relevant is that in a scientific/economic/otherwise “official” sense, overpopulation is not about physical space.
I’m unsure of how dire the situation with resources is. There are problems with overpopulation and then there are the problems with imbalance of power and misuse. For instance: I’ve often heard that, looked after, Sudan and South Sudan have the ability to feed all of Africa and significant populations of Europe, but years of strife have prevented the land from being as agriculturally developed as it could be. People are unable to empower themselves as a result. Then in the West, we have problems with waste; we are an extremely wasteful part of the world. An estimated three thousand pounds of food spoils per supermarket per year in the United States alone. And even when we do use all that we consume, we still consume more than we need.
So perhaps there is an abundance of resources- maybe there’s plenty of water, just not enough economic stability to get it to the people, and so on and so forth. This is possible, though I’ve no idea if it’s the case. Let us say that even if we are using all of the planet’s resources responsibly and ethically, we still have overpopulation because the demands are still too high. Only the extreme and hateful will argue that we need to start killing people.
We reduce the population by correcting poverty and we correct poverty by allowing communities around the globe to develop and empower themselves. To achieve this, we need to empower women, put an end to war, examine the roles that superpowers play in the current schema, ensure access to education and hospitals, et cetera.
And in some ways this relates back to abortion: the argument, “Well, abortion is okay because there are too many people anyway,” is therefore very flawed and missing the point about, well, all that I just mentioned.
Vannah,
My (soon-to-be) husband is a chef. He used to work at a restaurant that was part of a program that donated unused food which was no longer eligible for sale (yet still edible) to the needy. I went to visit him at work once, and asked why they were just throwing so much stuff away (it KILLED me to see it-I’m the oldest of 6 kids in my family, we DID NOT throw food away). He told me that they had to stop the program to feed the needy because someone tried to claim the food made them sick and sued. So, if you want to complain about waste, take it up with lawyers.
I worked at a soup kitchen that served such edible left-overs. Two things struck me: the cheerful demeanor of our clientelle and the odd (I thought) favoritism they showed to junk food. We’d cook the entree fresh, but the desserts and side dishes were second-hand. We’d also give them a side of fresh green salad. They’d tell me, “Don’t bother with the greens,” for example, “but can I have two puddings instead?”
Back to the cheerful demeanor: What is poverty? Is it a lack of material possessions? A lack of food? A lack of housing?
Once you work with the poor, you can’t help but see that they can make do without a lot, but they can’t make do without dignity. They wouldn’t rather be dead than poor, the way some entitled liberals think. If they keep showing up for meals, that indicates to me a pretty strong survival instinct. Our facility also had a day-shelter which meant they could come during the daytime, use the laundry, use the shower, and sometimes have a legal clinic and/or medical clinic, and more. All of this without using tax-payer money. It was run by donations. I am curious now how it’s going over there and think I’ll look into it.
“I worked at a soup kitchen that served such edible left-overs. Two things struck me: the cheerful demeanor of our clientelle and the odd (I thought) favoritism they showed to junk food. We’d cook the entree fresh, but the desserts and side dishes were second-hand. We’d also give them a side of fresh green salad. They’d tell me, “Don’t bother with the greens,” for example, “but can I have two puddings instead?””
Two factors I have seen from growing up in poverty and working with the homeless as an adult. A lot of people grow up being fed poorly and never learn proper nutrition, and their taste buds and bodies adapt to this poor diet so that decent food literally tastes bad and makes them feel sick. It’s a huge issue in poverty-plagued areas, obesity among the poorest from low-nutrition, high fat and sugar foods. Working moms who have no time between two jobs and their deadbeat husband who left are going to grab easy box meals and snacks that the kids can fix themselves, or feed everyone McDonalds before they have to rush off for their night job. It’s a real problem, and when people get older they just perpetuate the same issue.
Or, if any of them are heroin or crack addicts or users, they are probably just sugar junkies. I seriously ate nothing but Twinkies and chocolate for four years, when I bothered to eat at all, until I got clean. As if addicts didn’t have enough health problems, the typical diet is awful. I eat extremely healthy now to try and fix the damage I did.
Xalisae, I have heard about that, about restaurants being worried about liability so they throw stuff out instead of donating. I think in a lot of cases it’s ridiculous. I mean, meats maybe. But stuff like veggies and breads? I know a lot of that stuff gets thrown out and as long as it’s cooked properly it shouldn’t be an issue. People are ridiculous sometimes.
And Vannah, I do think that a lot of our “resource scarcity” problems are distribution problems, especially in the war torn areas and such. But eventually things like energy shortages are going to happen and we won’t be able to stop that (there are finite amounts of some things), hopefully we get some real renewable and sustainable energy technologies in the next few decades.
Jack, I worked at a coffee shop and at the end if the day, we had to throw out so much muffins and donuts because they were afraid of being sued for donating. The product was fresh baked THAT day!
What is poverty?
A lack of love for others.
Sarah, you just reminded me of the Seinfeld episode where “no one wants our muffin stumps!!”
Jack,
But eventually things like energy shortages are going to happen and we won’t be able to stop that (there are finite amounts of some things), hopefully we get some real renewable and sustainable energy technologies in the next few decades.
Preach.
From my understanding, we’re going to have a problem with water before we have a problem with energy (correct me if I’m wrong; this isn’t my field of expertise at all). It’s best to tackle these resource problems now before they become catastrophes.
Xalisae,
I didn’t know that you were engaged. Congratulations!
And I’m going to have to agree with the “Why can’t I donate this food?” crowd growing here. Maybe some food is unsafe, but come on…what is it with us Americans and lawsuits?
Jack: I don’t think most people who worry about overpopulation think that we literally don’t have enough space. I think they worry about running out of resources. Fossil fuels is a big concern of theirs.
Right – if, for the sake of argument, we’re willing to “put people on small circles of space in the middle of a river or lake,” i.e. the preposterously silly example of “Jacksonville, Florida,” etc., then there’s “lots of space left.” (And of course that’s not the issue in the first place.)
What’s operative is the amount of resources – and the amount of space it requires to produce them, etc. – that people are aware of. I’ve seen prices for wheat go from $50 to over $1200 per metric tonne. Crude oil from $3 per barrel to way over $100. Who hasn’t noticed the prices of meat lately? Milk, cheese, other grains?
It’s not just that we have over 7 billion people on earth. It’s that in about half the countries where that population is – China, India, Brazil, the Russian republics, etc. – they are only just now developing a middle class with purchasing power to buy meaningful amounts of this stuff. Sure – increased population weighs heavily on the cost of resources and food, in the end, but even without that, we’ve got built-in demographics at work that ensure that “rationing by price” is the order of the day.
What is “overpopulation”? I’d say the best definition is the point at which a majority of people think there’s too many people.
A couple of states (at least) have passed ‘good samaritan’ laws that protect businesses that give away ‘old’ food for free. The ones I know of do vary but the gist is, as long as their is no malicious intent, someone can’t sue if they get sick off of donated food (as in if the bakery gives away bread they know is ergot tainted they can be sued but if someone gets sick because one of the 20 tarts the gave away had a bit of ick on it they aren’t libel). We had neighbors for a time who collected mostly bread goods but sometimes other things as well under such circumstances and shared it first with the local neighbors (no one in that arpartment complex was rich) then donated it over to a local shelter. It was an awesome boost to our food budget to get some bakery goods or mildly expired shelf food once a week or so.
“Michelle Duggar doesn’t believe in overpopulation”
Ahahahhaaa!!!! Oh, is that right? I mean, she’s got like 19 kids already, right? Who would have thought?! ;)
“Michelle Duggar doesn’t believe in overpopulation”
Ahahahhaaa!!!! Oh, is that right? I mean, she’s got like 19 kids already, right? Who would have thought?!
Yeah, just think if she “did believe in overpopulation,” and still had 19 kids. Then, with that as the starting point, what if she didn’t believe in overpopulation? What then? 540 kids? :P
There’s never too much of a good population.
Hans, what about the surplus portion of the population? ;)
I love the Duggars! Although I sort of wish their tv exposure was a bit more limited. Like if they did a few specials a year, that would be great. The interest in them is there, and it seems that they feel called to minister via their show, but I guess I have reservations because children can’t really give their full consent to being on tv and having their childhoods put out for public consumption. While it may be the parents’ prerogative to consent for them, I wouldn’t have wanted everything I said/did as a young person (or even now, actually) recorded for all posterity.
Vannah, your first post on this topic was excellent. You said all the things I want to express to people when they complain about overpopulation, but you said them much better than I ever could. Seems like alot of the issues are more about some of humanity’s everpresent demons, eg, war and corrupt leadership, and even wastefulness, than an issue of resources per se.
Uncle Scrooge,
I predict you’ll change your mind by the end of the year, :)
Ahahhaaaaaaa!! Touche, Hans! :P :)
Doug,
God bless us, everyone! :)
This makes me think about consumerism like the issue of waste as well as the issues of the food system which are linked to the population. There are many things that are not being operated in a sustainable fashion. I recently watched a program that went over our current unsustainable ways of food production like monoculture, feedlots etc. Sustainability is key when talking about the future of people because their will not be any if the systems we rely so heavily on destruct. Our planet will not sustain.
It seems her understanding of the concept is “not accurate”. It’s not about how many people there are taking up physical space. It’s about how much of the available resources are required to support life (I.E. Food, drinkable water) Vs. how many resources are available.
actually, Jay, as explained further upthread, it’s actually more about logistics, which means yes, “overpopulation” is not a real thing.