4 ms·

> Sweden wasn't wreaking Poland's skies and waters as it industrialised. Citation needed. But just using logic, Sweden has about 10 million people today. Dur

> Sweden wasn't wreaking Poland's skies and waters as it industrialised. Citation needed. But just using logic, Sweden has about 10 million people today. During industrialization it probably had much less (there was a population explosion in Europe after WW2). Let's say Sweden had 5 million people. Industrializing country of 5 million of people vs industrializing country of 1-1.5 billion is something which is ridiculous to compare. Imagine trying to industrialize double or triple of Europe from agrarian society again and tell me you think it would be clean and tidy process.

whatyoucantsay 9y ago
More ridiculous is the idea that a nation deserves extra credit for being ridiculously overpopulated. In China's case, it's doubly absurd given that the CCP strong-armed an already too large populace into having more children for decades before wisely but again brutally reversing course with its famous one child policy. > "The 1950s census showed that China had 557 million people, and some professionally-trained demographers began urging that policies be put in place to limit population growth. Mao Zedong condemned such views on the grounds that under socialism a large population was a great resource, not a threat. Consequently, some of the most prominent proponents of birth control were labelled rightists and removed from power… by the time Mao died in 1976, China’s population exceeded 900 million." -Ebrey, Patricia Buckley (2010). The Cambridge Illustrated History of China, p. 327. In the future, we will likely see an even larger devastation of the environment from India and other countries with large and growing populations.
- richardknop 9y ago
  Well yes, I agree with you. China, India and don't forget about Africa (most countries in Africa now have average age around 20-25 years old and are multiplying populations very quickly). Not sure what can be done about it. I guess mother nature will sort that out once we run out of resources. It will be like a defensive reaction of an organism, human race might just get purged from the Earth.
  - thanksgiving 9y ago
    I don't want children. I imagine I'm not the only one. Get a dog or a cat or a goldfish or a cactus instead.
    - richardknop 9y ago
      99.9% of people disagree with you. You might not be the only one but you are part of tiny minority which doesn't influence anything. For every person like you who doesn't want kids there are hundred families somewhere in developing world with 5-8 children.
      - andrewaylett 9y ago
        Not as many as you might think: Total Fertility Rate drops rapidly as survival rate and economic activity picks up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#/media/File:Trends_in_TFR_1950-2050.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#/media/Fi...
        elygre 9y ago
        Hans Rosling had a great TED talk or two on the subject!
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - thriftwy 9y ago
    I would just like to say that I have no urge to be purged anywhere on the grounds of africans or indians multiplying. They can purge themself all the ways they like.
    - mathgeek 9y ago
      When it comes to the environment being the source of change, you may not have a choice in discrimination.
- oblio 9y ago
  We can take this both ways: up until the 60s or so the West also viewed more people as a forte. It's just that it started from a lower base, the US started from 100 million people when China was at 300+ million...
  - richardknop 9y ago
    Also after WW2 most young men in Europe were dead or maimed so in 50s and 60s governments supported population explosion so Europe would replenish tens of millions of young people it lost in the war and could rebuild its decimated economy.
- Feniks 9y ago
  Ha Mao almost sounds as a Catholic priest! Capitalism saves us all. Children become too expensive so couple's will only have 2. Or none, if Korea and Japan predict a trend.
- 0xcde4c3db 9y ago
  > More ridiculous is the idea that a nation deserves extra credit for being ridiculously overpopulated. I don't think the idea is "extra credit", but rather a matter of scale changing the nature of the problem, just as you wouldn't directly compare the problem of networking 10 computers to the problem of networking 1000 computers.

whatyoucantsay 9y ago

More ridiculous is the idea that a nation deserves extra credit for being ridiculously overpopulated. In China's case, it's doubly absurd given that the CCP strong-armed an already too large populace into having more children for decades before wisely but again brutally reversing course with its famous one child policy. > "The 1950s census showed that China had 557 million people, and some professionally-trained demographers began urging that policies be put in place to limit population growth. Mao Zedong condemned such views on the grounds that under socialism a large population was a great resource, not a threat. Consequently, some of the most prominent proponents of birth control were labelled rightists and removed from power… by the time Mao died in 1976, China’s population exceeded 900 million." -Ebrey, Patricia Buckley (2010). The Cambridge Illustrated History of China, p. 327. In the future, we will likely see an even larger devastation of the environment from India and other countries with large and growing populations.

richardknop 9y ago
Well yes, I agree with you. China, India and don't forget about Africa (most countries in Africa now have average age around 20-25 years old and are multiplying populations very quickly). Not sure what can be done about it. I guess mother nature will sort that out once we run out of resources. It will be like a defensive reaction of an organism, human race might just get purged from the Earth.
- thanksgiving 9y ago
  I don't want children. I imagine I'm not the only one. Get a dog or a cat or a goldfish or a cactus instead.
  - richardknop 9y ago
    99.9% of people disagree with you. You might not be the only one but you are part of tiny minority which doesn't influence anything. For every person like you who doesn't want kids there are hundred families somewhere in developing world with 5-8 children.
    - andrewaylett 9y ago
      Not as many as you might think: Total Fertility Rate drops rapidly as survival rate and economic activity picks up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#/media/File:Trends_in_TFR_1950-2050.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#/media/Fi...
      - elygre 9y ago
        Hans Rosling had a great TED talk or two on the subject!
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- thriftwy 9y ago
  I would just like to say that I have no urge to be purged anywhere on the grounds of africans or indians multiplying. They can purge themself all the ways they like.
  - mathgeek 9y ago
    When it comes to the environment being the source of change, you may not have a choice in discrimination.
oblio 9y ago
We can take this both ways: up until the 60s or so the West also viewed more people as a forte. It's just that it started from a lower base, the US started from 100 million people when China was at 300+ million...
- richardknop 9y ago
  Also after WW2 most young men in Europe were dead or maimed so in 50s and 60s governments supported population explosion so Europe would replenish tens of millions of young people it lost in the war and could rebuild its decimated economy.
Feniks 9y ago
Ha Mao almost sounds as a Catholic priest! Capitalism saves us all. Children become too expensive so couple's will only have 2. Or none, if Korea and Japan predict a trend.
0xcde4c3db 9y ago
> More ridiculous is the idea that a nation deserves extra credit for being ridiculously overpopulated. I don't think the idea is "extra credit", but rather a matter of scale changing the nature of the problem, just as you wouldn't directly compare the problem of networking 10 computers to the problem of networking 1000 computers.