Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Why food prices may keep climbing
- We have the same experience in India. The better educated southern Indian states have a lower population growth rate. So I guess it is agreed that if education doesn't reach everyone, we will not have a population contraction?? Ergo, we need to educate everyone for ensuring we have a manageable population by 2050? That is what I have been saying all along, not extermination like someone thought I said.
p.s. how come the Jarawa tribes in the Andaman islands managed to keep their population under control -voluntarily- for so many thousand years without education? now that brings us to the q of what kind of education it is that we need.
Sent from my BSNL landline B-fone
Tel - 09370010424, 0253-2361161
--- On Thu, 24/3/11, Pietro <2009@...> wrote:
From: Pietro <2009@...>
Subject: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Why food prices may keep climbing
Date: Thursday, 24 March, 2011, 3:23 PM
Population is something that has been studied pretty well in the last years. The Malthusian idea that population will grow exponentially have been proven wrong. In western countries we already are seeing a decline, if not for immigration that is basically keeping it stable. The key elements that stop population growth are medicine and education. And in particular female education and lowering the mortality rate of kids in the first 5 years. Once female education raises, and families realise that they can have kids without having the risks of having them die in their first years, then the number of children per family drops drammatically. This is the reason why the western world have been pushing so much for female education and health.
Right now the most recent forecast show that we are going to reach about 9 billion of people and this around 2050, and then the population will start contracting again.
So take those numbers into account when you think about how to use natural farming to feed the world.
In one tweet:
Malthus was wrong. Feeding an educated, healthy world will not make it explode. We'll be 9 billions.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Sumant Joshi <sumant_jo@...> wrote:
> The issue is, right now, maybe, just maybe, at present population levels, the land and resources may be enough. But if human population is allowed to grow exponentially, how long do you think these resources will last? and if we take over all the land, where will all the animals go? or are we looking at putting al of them in zoos? eco systems will collapse and so will human populations, disastrously at that. If we try to put a cap on population now, we will still exceed the planet's carrying capacity. It is not necessary to use drastic methods like someone thinks I am suggesting. You really need to come and see south east Asian nations to understand what over population really means.
> Dr. Albert Bartlett was right when he said "The Greatest Shortcoming of the Human Race is our Inability to Understand the Exponential Function"
> Sent from my BSNL landline B-fone
> Warm regards,
> Sumant Joshi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]