5 ms·

Unless I'm missing something, the Gompertz function you refer to has an implicit model that the organism's population stabilizes because of Malthusian constrain

Unless I'm missing something, the Gompertz function you refer to has an implicit model that the organism's population stabilizes because of Malthusian constraints, a lack of some kind of resource. But birth rates have been declining in first-world countries for a long time in the absence of this kind of constraint, and the Foreign Affairs article specifically notes that both Malthus and Paul Ehrlich's "Population Bomb" doomsday resource-shortage scenarios didn't come to pass. The Earth certainly does have some kind of carrying capacity for humans, but that's not the limit that's being it, it's something else.

bane 7y ago
It's often observed that as societies grow richer, their birthrate plummets. The paradox is that in order to tap into those riches people have to work more, which may be one of the explanations for why the population tends to decline in those countries. Thus the constraint may just be "time to make babies".
- allana 7y ago
  Time and resources to make and support babies is a big constraint. Most parents want to provide a standard of living to their kids that is better than what they grew up in, which costs significantly more to provide. Kids didn't always have their own bedrooms or cellphones, and in an agrarian society kids were useful as extra "free" labor. The shift to cities has rewritten the economic calculations potential parents do.
- topmonk 7y ago
  Children used to be a way to support oneself in retirement. The more children you had, the better chance that at least one or two would be around in adulthood to take care of you. Affluence means you have the means to take care of yourself, so therefore don't need to spend the effort of raising kids for this reason.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    In the US, I would say affluence actually allows you to have children, if you want to provide them with life in a good school district and a single family home in a suburb close to burgeoning city. You have to borrow student loans, then work to save for a down payment, then save for childbirth and health expenses. Now you have structural costs of student loan debt repayment, mortgage debt repayment, daycare, property tax, retirement savings debt, and possible vehicle debt repayment. And now you’ve advanced in age, and you can only have 2 kids.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
_0ffh 7y ago
I think western population development has gone sustainable largely due to social advancements re women. Not all parts of the world have yet had that kind of progress, and are still happily multiplying in an unsustainable way. Unless we manage to export this kind of progress, I fear we will not be able to avoid all overpopulation issues. One problem is that costly (in loss of lives) regional wars over resources and the enslavement of women as a means of replenishment for your armies are a circular feedback mechanism. Unless the circle of war and patriarchy is broken, some cultures will probably expand to their malthusian limits.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  > the enslavement of women as a means of replenishment for your armies What society has ever done that?
  - crooked-v 7y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women
    - topmonk 7y ago
      We're they raping in order to replenish their armies? The claim is rather far fetched.
      - _0ffh 7y ago
        The word "rape" in this context is taken to mean abduction. This is then followed by the integration of the abductees into the abductor's society. From the article: "At the festival, Romulus gave a signal, at which the Romans grabbed the Sabine women and fought off the Sabine men. The indignant abductees were soon implored by Romulus to accept Roman husbands". That the second phase may have employed carrots as well as sticks does not detract from the fact that the Romans have thereby managed to expand their reproductive capacities while simultaneously contracting that of the rival Sabines.

bane 7y ago

It's often observed that as societies grow richer, their birthrate plummets. The paradox is that in order to tap into those riches people have to work more, which may be one of the explanations for why the population tends to decline in those countries. Thus the constraint may just be "time to make babies".

allana 7y ago
Time and resources to make and support babies is a big constraint. Most parents want to provide a standard of living to their kids that is better than what they grew up in, which costs significantly more to provide. Kids didn't always have their own bedrooms or cellphones, and in an agrarian society kids were useful as extra "free" labor. The shift to cities has rewritten the economic calculations potential parents do.
topmonk 7y ago
Children used to be a way to support oneself in retirement. The more children you had, the better chance that at least one or two would be around in adulthood to take care of you. Affluence means you have the means to take care of yourself, so therefore don't need to spend the effort of raising kids for this reason.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  In the US, I would say affluence actually allows you to have children, if you want to provide them with life in a good school district and a single family home in a suburb close to burgeoning city. You have to borrow student loans, then work to save for a down payment, then save for childbirth and health expenses. Now you have structural costs of student loan debt repayment, mortgage debt repayment, daycare, property tax, retirement savings debt, and possible vehicle debt repayment. And now you’ve advanced in age, and you can only have 2 kids.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

_0ffh 7y ago

I think western population development has gone sustainable largely due to social advancements re women. Not all parts of the world have yet had that kind of progress, and are still happily multiplying in an unsustainable way. Unless we manage to export this kind of progress, I fear we will not be able to avoid all overpopulation issues. One problem is that costly (in loss of lives) regional wars over resources and the enslavement of women as a means of replenishment for your armies are a circular feedback mechanism. Unless the circle of war and patriarchy is broken, some cultures will probably expand to their malthusian limits.

WalterBright 7y ago
> the enslavement of women as a means of replenishment for your armies What society has ever done that?
- crooked-v 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rape_of_the_Sabine_Women
  - topmonk 7y ago
    We're they raping in order to replenish their armies? The claim is rather far fetched.
    - _0ffh 7y ago
      The word "rape" in this context is taken to mean abduction. This is then followed by the integration of the abductees into the abductor's society. From the article: "At the festival, Romulus gave a signal, at which the Romans grabbed the Sabine women and fought off the Sabine men. The indignant abductees were soon implored by Romulus to accept Roman husbands". That the second phase may have employed carrots as well as sticks does not detract from the fact that the Romans have thereby managed to expand their reproductive capacities while simultaneously contracting that of the rival Sabines.