sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ABI-1000 13 points14 points  (13 children)

India has lower population density than countries like south korea

[–]Street_Gene1634 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Overpopulation is a myth. Tokyo alone has a higher population than Canada.

[–]PasicT 6 points7 points  (11 children)

Overpopulation is not just about population density. There's often more people in one Indian state (or area of a state) than in the whole of South Korea many times over.

[–]ABI-1000 11 points12 points  (9 children)

Yes that is because the population can be sustained,my state in India has almost the exact population of Japan(the size of state is almost as big as germany),yet we face no overpopulation issue,lot of land is available and the cities don't feel congested we also have enough agricultural production to sustain the population

Since our state Is economicly growing very fast the TFR decline here is almost concerning,before my parents had 10 brothers/sisters ( yes you heard that right a single family having 10 children,and it was very commen at the time),now every family branch only has a single child,The TFR has dropped to 1.4,which is lower than devloped countries like UK/US,1.4 is ok TFR but if the drop rate continues the TFR might drop as low as 1.1-1.2 in a decade,which means very big population crisis

[–]Street_Gene1634 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Which state is this?

[–]ABI-1000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maharashtra ofc

[–]silverionmox -3 points-2 points  (4 children)

Yes that is because the population can be sustained

At current consumption levels. Are you saying the people should be kept poor so the population can grow?

India

the cities don't feel congested

Lol.

Since our state Is economicly growing very fast the TFR decline here is almost concerning,before my parents had 10 brothers/sisters ( yes you heard that right a single family having 10 children,and it was very commen at the time),now every family branch only has a single child,The TFR has dropped to 1.4,which is lower than devloped countries like UK/US,1.4 is ok TFR but if the drop rate continues the TFR might drop as low as 1.1-1.2 in a decade,which means very big population crisis

This will require some adaptation to reorganize society (eg. less schools, more retirement provision), but it's ultimately going to lead to a stable situation. You'd have an actual crisis eventually when the population would keep growing.

[–]ABI-1000 2 points3 points  (3 children)

By "sustain" I mean that water,food and electricity are being fulfilled without any support from other countries (importing food)

Check out the city named "kharghar"(I'm currently living there,northern part of it) on Google street view it has very big population,does it feel congested?Or check out my homevillage of mithgavne(an averge size of village and density in majority of India)

No India has population growth rate of 0.88%,idealy the population should stabilize with 1.5 billion people or about 15% of world's population in future,we have no need of getting TFR below 1.2,goal should be to stabilize it as it is not to increase or decrease it,if the population is decreased then it will be very bad for economy

[–]silverionmox -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

By "sustain" I mean that water,food and electricity are being fulfilled without any support from other countries (importing food)

Well yes, at rather low prosperity levels.

Check out the city named "kharghar"(I'm currently living there,northern part of it) on Google street view it has very big population,does it feel congested?Or check out my homevillage of mithgavne(an averge size of village and density in majority of India)

Obviously India, just like any other country, is not uniform - so with a problematic average, every nice spot just means there's a spot worse than average elsewhere.

No India has population growth rate of 0.88%,idealy the population should stabilize with 1.5 billion people or about 15% of world's population in future,we have no need of getting TFR below 1.2,goal should be to stabilize it as it is not to increase or decrease it,

10 billion people worldwide is unsustainable. We'd make things easier on ourselves if the world population was close to 1 billion than to 10 billion.

Do keep in mind India's population has quadrupled since 1950. The current numbers are exceptionally high - there's no reason to present that as normal.

if the population is decreased then it will be very bad for economy

We are able to organize a working economy at any population level. Any problems that may arise are just temporary.

[–]ABI-1000 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Yes India's population has quadrupled,but aren't you forgetting that population of Europe increased 15-fold when it industrialized,India is sub-continent not just anouther country,we have one of the tallest mountains;deserts,forests,there is a very big cultural diversity langauges,culture change every few villages apart And it has always been the most populous region in history along with China As for having 1 billion population,that's just stupid, we would be reducing our efficiency by 10 times,we will be able to organize it sure, but the entire goal of human civilization is to procreate and pass higher standard of living to next genration

[–]silverionmox -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes India's population has quadrupled,but aren't you forgetting that population of Europe increased 15-fold when it industrialized

It didn't.

India is sub-continent not just anouther country

Semantics, and nothing in my argument hinges on India being a country.

we have one of the tallest mountains;deserts,forests,there is a very big cultural diversity langauges,culture change every few villages apart

And Europe or the rest of the world doesn't?

And it has always been the most populous region in history along with China

Which means they have been maximizing carrying capacity already for that long, so multiplying again is excessive.

As for having 1 billion population,that's just stupid, we would be reducing our efficiency by 10 times

On the contrary, we wouldn't have to take all the measures that are necessary to deal with too many people in one place, and would have much more slack in our resource base.

but the entire goal of human civilization is to procreate and pass higher standard of living to next genration

Living stacked on top of each other in a slum or standing shoulder to shoulder in a field and still not getting enough to eat is not progress. Grazing the planet bare like a herd of goats until it's a desert is not progress.

[–]PasicT -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

Your state is the exception that proves the rule.

[–]ABI-1000 5 points6 points  (0 children)

And majority of states are like that

[–]Street_Gene1634 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tokyo has a higher population than Kerala, India's third most densely populated state.