Cities at the tipping point - overpopulation destroying major U.S. cities.

March 6, 2007 | Joe Lynch

[MunnaP]

Quote:
The US would comfortably support a billion people. There is tons of available land, and we already feed a quarter of the world with our agricultural exports.


I would prefer not to see a billion in the US...But 400-500 million would be just acceptable....As the Chinese economic size goes on increasing, we have to expand to stay on the top of the game...in PPP terms Chinese are almost near the US economic size...Without a large population, it is not possible to have a large enough economy....

[MunnaP]

I have one thing to say about the Hagel-Martinez....

A huge demographic change is coming in the US in the next 20 years...77 million people would start retiring and put strain on the social services, Medicare and social security...No one seems to have a plan to deal with the labor shortage to...

What would be worse.....??

Getting 66 million new immigrants through Hagel Martinez or economic meltdown because of the demographic change ???

[brazzaville]

Good morning.
"nobody needs 12 acres per person these days."

I do. My wife and I are planning on buying 10 acres adjacent to ours. We've only got 10 acres now so we'll still be 4 acres short.

I moved where I did for the space and it has more to do with sanity than food production.

Michael Frazier

[wolfcreek]

"I imagine much of Texas is in the same boat."


There was an interesting article in TP&W Mag this month about tree rings. They examined 1000 yr old cypress trees.
( each yr a tree grows a new ring... wider during wet yrs and narrower during dry ones)


The official *drought of record, based on modern accounts was 1947-57 yet, droughts in 1571-80, 1707-17 and 1885-94, far exceeded the *drought of record*


In Texas, water has always been more precious and valuable than anything including, oil. Even though We're a huge state land wise, our environmental footprint is much larger than the 10 or 12 acres noted in this article. IOW, there were many more narrow tree rings than wide ones over the last 1000yrs.

[bannie]

What a load of crap.

The loads of crap have to be dumped somewhere...

[A. Pole]

Behind China and India, the U.S. is the third most populous nation in the world and we’re fast catching up.

Bump

[SoCal Pubbie]

"The 405 from Orange County all the way north through the San Fernando Valley has been reduced to a crawl all day long. "

And why is it that the 405 IN Orange County is NOT reduced to a crawl all day long? Could it be that the OC has actually spent the money on expanding the freeway instead of billions for mass transit? Hmmm?

[mhx]

I wonder what the "carrying capacity" of China or India is, analyzed using this methodology.

Population causes a load on the environment, and it becomes more challenging to maintain quality of life and standard of living, but people are also economic activity, power, and not least importantly a blessing from God.

[SoCal Pubbie]

The population of the United States in 1870 was 38 million. It doubled to 76 million by 1900, just thirty year later. If one were to have made a projection based on then current growth rates, the population of the U.S. should have been 912 million in 2005. The problem with projections is that they assume a constant state and cannot predict future change.

[kabar]

The population of the United States in 1870 was 38 million. It doubled to 76 million by 1900, just thirty year later. If one were to have made a projection based on then current growth rates, the population of the U.S. should have been 912 million in 2005. The problem with projections is that they assume a constant state and cannot predict future change.

A rather dubious comparison. The Bureau of the Census projections are constantly being revised. Using your example of the projecting the population of the US 105 years later usng the period 1870 to 1900 is specious. The Bureau of the Census projection for 2030 is relatively a short timeframe. It is only 23 years from now.

Secondly, the population of the US is not only affected by birth rates, but also by immigration policy and the lack of control over our borders. We are taking in 1 million LEGAL immigrants a year and 500,000 to 1 million illegal aliens. If the senate comprehensive immigration bill passes, then we could be adding an additional 60 million persons by over the next twenty years. Certain public policy changes can affect future population projections.

Finally, more Americans are living longer, which could affect the numbers. Agreed that these are just projections or educated guesses, but there is no dispute that we have added about 100 million to our population since 1970 and about 20 million since 2000 with immigration accounting for about 3/4 of the population increase. There are about 6 million future immigrants waiting in line overseas due to the caps on various categories under the chain migration policies.

Do you believe population projections are useful or worthwhile? We also use projections to forecast when Social Security will start paying out more than it is taking in [2017]. Do you believe these projections?

Census Bureau Population estimates

[JasonC]

Fine by me, but "per person" means every single one, and it isn't remotely required.

[JasonC]

Your preference is silly, there is no reason whatever not to want a billion Americans. In 3-4 generations it is about where we will be. Population simply grows over time when the technology and wealth are there to support it. Which is a good thing in every way. Malthusians are simply idiots in the matter, who do not understand either the scale involved or the real sources of wealth, and imagine thinner slices of the same pizza etc.

[KevinDavis]

I'm going to be one of them.. I visited the Phoenix area sometime ago I met a lot of people from the Chicago area...

[attiladhun2]

Behind China and India, the U.S. is the third most populous nation in the world and we’re fast catching up.

Fast catching up to China's 1.4 billion and India's more than 1 billion? I rather doubt that.

[SoCal Pubbie]

Any projection for the future based on the past has an excellent chance of being proved inaccurate, since the change brought about by current trends leads to unforeseen consequences in the future.

[kabar]

The projections are only as good as the data that support it. We use such projections in business all of the time. Insurance is a good example. What is your point? That we not use projections at all?

[GOP_1900AD]

But we're not catching up that fast. We just hit 300. Although some very overly optimistic types forecast 400 later this century I remain skeptical, and suspect we'll actually go the way of Europe. Even the immigrants become dinks or single childers after a single generation. Plus no way open borders will continue more than a week after the next big attack.