The future of our dysfunctional society?

I was thinking about the future of our society. (Not a good idea)

In 1950 the world population was about 2.5 billion. 60 years later it's 7 billion. That is 2.8 times as much as it was in 1950. Now let's pretend our new superior technology that makes it possible for us to genetically enhance food will make it possible for us to grow even more.

2.8 times 7 billion is about 20 billion. Which means we will be 20 billion people on earth in about 40 years from now. If we look on the current problems we are facing in our world today.

• War
• Ignorance
• Starvation
• Natural disasters
• Crime

Which of the above will double with the population growth of the world? I think it's safe to say that more people will mean more poverty which will result in more crime and probably war. The question is if we will have to redesign our society in any way, because let's face it the way we currently live our lives can't keep going forever.

What do you think our species will have to do in order to survive the next 100 years on this earth?

I thought I read somewhere that the global population will peak around 2050 as demand for resources outstrips the ability to supply them. It wouldn't surprise me it if did. Eventually we'll reach equilibrium or the sun will supernova. Either way, nothing you or I ever do will cause any significant effect.

I don't know what our species will have to do to survive the next 100 years. And since I'm probably dead in about 50 years all I'm gonna do is leave a post-it note saying "Sorry, now clean up after us, moron"

WE NEED TO GO TO SPAAAAAAAACE 
 
SPACE SPACE... SO MUCH SPACE... GOTTA SEE IT ALL

i would say crime, ignorance and natural disasters. crime and ignorance would grow since population would grow. i think natural disaster would still be a problem like what we have right now. the snow storm that we had in october. it was pretty crazy to hear snow in october.

To be fair, all of human history has pretty much consisted of war, ignorance, disaster, and crime.

@McGhee_the_Insomniac said:

@Hermoor said: The way you are projecting the population out to 20 billion is all wrong.

Oh, in what way is it wrong?

@mosespippy said:

I thought I read somewhere that the global population will peak around 2050 as demand for resources outstrips the ability to supply them. It wouldn't surprise me it if did. Eventually we'll reach equilibrium or the sun will supernova. Either way, nothing you or I ever do will cause any significant effect.

So basically you are saying we are doomed and there is nothing we can do about it. So when will our species die out in your opinion?

@ZeForgotten said:

I don't know what our species will have to do to survive the next 100 years. And since I'm probably dead in about 50 years all I'm gonna do is leave a post-it note saying "Sorry, now clean up after us, moron"

If you hold that view, do not get children!

@fishmicmuffin said:

WE NEED TO GO TO SPAAAAAAAACE SPACE SPACE... SO MUCH SPACE... GOTTA SEE IT ALL

I think that is unrealistic, 50 years ago we went on the moon. Still there are no bases on it, we haven't even visited it since. Space I think is dead and will remain to be dead for a long time if not ever.

Question is if the intelligence of our species will continue to grow or if "we" will keep being as dumb as we are. (Most people are really stupid)

@McGhee_the_Insomniac said:

@Hermoor said: The way you are projecting the population out to 20 billion is all wrong.

You are doing a linear prediction, in the sense that you are applying current conditions to the vision of your future. Future is never linear.

The picture ain't pretty, still, one thing is knowing the path to travel, other is actually traveling it. Things will change in the meantime, and the future won't be like you predicted. I hope and I will work for a better one, but a better one depends on us all.

@Hermoor said:

@ZeForgotten said:

I don't know what our species will have to do to survive the next 100 years. And since I'm probably dead in about 50 years all I'm gonna do is leave a post-it note saying "Sorry, now clean up after us, moron"

If you hold that view, do not get children!

Lucky for me then that it's not something you can decide on. But you're right my child might grow up to be just like you and that would probably be the worst thing ever to happen to the world. At least judging you by your posts on here. Who knows, the real you in the real world might be a cool person.. couldn't say that with a straight face but that still doesn't mean it's not true :P

I'm taking a class in environmental analysis and my hippie professor loves to rant about this stuff. Here's the class website. Specifically more info is on the global issues power point. Honestly some people are just paranoid though. The invisible hand will guide us to safety.

A lower percentage of people are dieing to hunger and war than any time in the history of human existence. And your numbers are horribly off according to this article.

The U.N. estimates the world population will reach 8 billion by 2025 and 10 billion by 2083.

@SirPsychoSexy: The U.N. estimates the world population will reach 8 billion by 2025 and 10 billion by 2083.

WIth pure logic one can say those numbers are unrealistic. We were 2 billion 60 years ago today we are 7 billion. Those numbers would be correct if people stopped having children. I don't think that will happen...

Lucky for me then that it's not something you can decide on. But you're right my child might grow up to be just like you and that would probably be the worst thing ever to happen to the world.

I'm not the one throwing random insults around, if you don't care about the future then why would you have children? Your child would be living in this future, not caring about the future because you will be dead is the same as not caring about your potential child. If you don't care about the future you don't care about your children and should therefore not have any in my opinion.

Future is never linear.

You are right it might even be more than 20 billion in the future. With our new technology that makes it possible for us to live longer and healthier. Our new medicines and our genetic food. It could probably be more than 20 billion in the future. But i doubt we will stop at around 9 billion. With each person having about two children and those children having children within twenty years...it's just not realistic to think we will stop at around 9 billion. People live too long for that to be the case...

The question we are faced with, what should we do?

• Forced castration
• Genocide
• Population control

Also maybe we should keep the suffering of other species in mind also. In which case we would probably have to stop breeding up animals just for slaughter.

Does that mean china is doing it right then?

Babies are edible. Just putting that out there.

If we get overpopulated, people will starve and die, the numbers will thin out then people will cease starving. The cycle continues. It happens with other species all the time.

I'm just shooting for dying somewhere between 2070 and 2080. Could the world stay pretty until then?

@Hermoor said:

@mosespippy said:

I thought I read somewhere that the global population will peak around 2050 as demand for resources outstrips the ability to supply them. It wouldn't surprise me it if did. Eventually we'll reach equilibrium or the sun will supernova. Either way, nothing you or I ever do will cause any significant effect.

So basically you are saying we are doomed and there is nothing we can do about it. So when will our species die out in your opinion?

@fishmicmuffin said:

WE NEED TO GO TO SPAAAAAAAACE SPACE SPACE... SO MUCH SPACE... GOTTA SEE IT ALL

I think that is unrealistic, 50 years ago we went on the moon. Still there are no bases on it, we haven't even visited it since. Space I think is dead and will remain to be dead for a long time if not ever.

The reason there isn't a base on the moon or any interest in mars is because they aren't habitable. If we find a place we can get to that has water and is the right temperature then that's where the space program needs to focus. It took 10 years for us to get to the moon once we decided to try and develop the technology to do it. The planet will get destroyed at some point and the human species with it unless we can colonize other planets or moons. Any base set up on the moon or mars is doomed to fail because we can't live there without complex systems in place that would end in catastrophe if they ceased to function.

As far as the problems for the species on earth; some regions will fare better than others. Bangladesh has the twelfth highest population density and has an average altitude of 1m above sea level. It's fucked as sea levels rise. Canada and Russia have huge excesses of undeveloped land and other resources and as the north thaws the more they will have access to. Africa's and Asia's overpopulation and poverty problems aren't going to interfere with the crime rates or cause wars in North America. So even if some regions grow to the point that they choke themselves out the species will live on in other areas.

@Hermoor: I don't know if your math is right or wrong and I don't care either. Now to answer this question.

As the population grows both crime and starvation will go up, they go hand in hand. The more mouths to feed means less food to give, which in turn will give people a very good reason to turn to crime. That life of crime will become the only way to live for some to survive. If the population continues to rise even still. Then three things will happen. First resources will run thin, the metal needed to make everything need right now and maybe things we haven't invented yet will begin to vanish. The second is of course food, as I said before the more mouths one must feed the less food there is. Just look at any family and you will see this fact. At last is the third which is natural disaster. A natural disaster can cause both starvation and crime to happen in single instant. However, on rare occasions it can destroy certain valuable resources.

War will only happen when only both food and resources became to scarce. But it is important to remember that in the end, War is the great equalizer. As a war rages it kills and if it kills then the number of people alive begins to drop. So in the end either we as a species decide to go toward the stars in search of more worlds to inhabit or we use war to keep or numbers small enough to survive on a single planet.

I hope that helps you in some way.

@Hermoor said:

@SirPsychoSexy: The U.N. estimates the world population will reach 8 billion by 2025 and 10 billion by 2083.

WIth pure logic one can say those numbers are unrealistic. We were 2 billion 60 years ago today we are 7 billion. Those numbers would be correct if people stopped having children. I don't think that will happen...

People were having a lot more children 60 years ago, the fertility rate was about 5 children per woman in her lifetime, it is down to about 2.3 and falling right now . The United States Census Bureau, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, and Population Reference Bureau all estimate about 9 Billion in 2050, and I think they have done a bit more research than guessing based on our population 60 years ago.

Edit: I also don't think starvation will be a problem, we have such an abundance of food right now it is ridiculous, and with more technology we will only get more efficient at making it. Sure there are some 3rd world countries that are still not developed and suffer from starvation, but the percentage of people dieing from hunger drops every year. As for war that will always happen, but with the technology we have now this is really what we need to worry about, and I don't see any solutions.

@SirPsychoSexy: The U.N. estimates the world population will reach 8 billion by 2025 and 10 billion by 2083.

WIth pure logic one can say those numbers are unrealistic. We were 2 billion 60 years ago today we are 7 billion. Those numbers would be correct if people stopped having children. I don't think that will happen...

@Hermoor said:

@SirPsychoSexy: The U.N. estimates the world population will reach 8 billion by 2025 and 10 billion by 2083.

WIth pure logic one can say those numbers are unrealistic. We were 2 billion 60 years ago today we are 7 billion. Those numbers would be correct if people stopped having children. I don't think that will happen...

Sorry what? You think professionals who came up with that prediction after years of research are completely wrong, and your factless baseless "pure logic" is correct? If you think that the population growth of the planet is going to continue at the exact same speed, you are fucking crazy. You should go take some courses where you study this sort of thing and realize how insane your guesses are.
 
Let me offer a few facts about why your guess is crazy:
 
World historical and predicted total fertility rates (1950–2100), 2010 rev ( Source, Wikipedia for more info)

Years	TFR	Years	TFR	Years	TFR
1950–1955	4.95	2000–2005	2.62	2050–2055	1.61
1955–1960	4.89	2005–2010	2.52	2055–2060	1.54
1960–1965	4.91	2010–2015	2.34	2060–2065	1.47
1965–1970	4.85	2015–2020	2.19	2065–2070	1.38
1970–1975	4.45	2020–2025	2.10	2070–2075	1.32
1975–1980	3.84	2025–2030	2.02	2075–2080	1.26
1980–1985	3.59	2030–2035	1.95	2080–2085	1.25
1985–1990	3.39	2035–2040	1.82	2085–2090	1.24
1990–1995	3.04	2040–2045	1.74	2090–2095	1.24
1995–2000	2.79	2045–2050	1.67	2095–2100	1.23

I think this speaks for itself, but you can see that world fertility rates are declining. The average number of kids has been cut in half over the past 60 years. Obviously as the future predictions get farther out, their accuracy will most likely decrease, but the important part is the decline.
 
Now, according to the United Nations' World Population Prospects report, the world population is growing by about 74 million people a year ( Source and tons of info), by 2050 we will reach 9 billion people, assuming a decrease in TFR from 2.5 to 2.0. Some high end estimates have placed the population as high as 11 billion. 
 
"The highest rates of growth – global increases above 1.8% per year – were seen briefly during the 1950s, and for a longer period during the 1960s and 1970s. The growth rate peaked at 2.2% in 1963, and had declined to 1.1% by 2009. Annual births peaked at 173 million in the late 1990s, and are now expected to remain constant at their 2011 level of 134 million, while deaths number 56 million per year, and are expected to increase to 80 million per year by 2040" ( Source 1, Source 2)
 
Much of the modern industrialized world's population is expected to stay around the same, while some countries are expected to actually decline, like Russia or the Ukraine ( Excellent article and sources on that here)
 
On the other hand, nearly half (49%) of the expected population growth over the next 40 years is expected to come from Africa. Actually, African and Asian populations are the ones that are increasing, not the World's population. 

So what we have are some countries experiencing a rapid growth in population due to many of the same reasons that industrialized countries had during their growth. Mainly, "Dramatic reductions in mortality, with lagging reductions in fertility." (Harvard Economics & Demography Professor David Bloom, source)   Eventually these countries will reach a similar outcome and find a stable population that they can support properly and won't move very much from there, but they are currently experiencing a ton of growth like we did.   I could continue this all night really, there's a ton of information out there, information with science and facts, which you can read. The bottom line is that the population is increasing, but we are getting close to the maximum population the planet can support (Though this changes constantly as we get better technology or as we fuck up the planet more). I just hope you realize that your "Pure logic" is not any sort of logic at all. I think you are right that the world has many challenges going forwards from here, and hopefully we can figure out how to deal with them.

Overpopulation --> fewer resources --> war.

Sad and inevitable. No country in the world will vote for a government that put restrictions on childbirth. As resources become scarce diplomatic relations will become more and more hostile. Eventually it will come to war. After that who knows?

Personally I don't think woman should be allowed more than 2 successful births. But that's just me.

Personally I don't think PEOPLE should be allowed more than 2 successful births. But that's just me.

*edit*

@Hermoor said:

@SirPsychoSexy: The U.N. estimates the world population will reach 8 billion by 2025 and 10 billion by 2083.

WIth pure logic one can say those numbers are unrealistic. We were 2 billion 60 years ago today we are 7 billion. Those numbers would be correct if people stopped having children. I don't think that will happen...

Sorry what? You think professionals who came up with that prediction after years of research are completely wrong, and your factless baseless "pure logic" is correct? If you think that the population growth of the planet is going to continue at the exact same speed, you are fucking crazy. You should go take some courses where you study this sort of thing and realize how insane your guesses are.
 
Let me offer a few facts about why your guess is crazy:
 
World historical and predicted total fertility rates (1950–2100), 2010 rev ( Source, Wikipedia for more info)

Years	TFR	Years	TFR	Years	TFR
1950–1955	4.95	2000–2005	2.62	2050–2055	1.61
1955–1960	4.89	2005–2010	2.52	2055–2060	1.54
1960–1965	4.91	2010–2015	2.34	2060–2065	1.47
1965–1970	4.85	2015–2020	2.19	2065–2070	1.38
1970–1975	4.45	2020–2025	2.10	2070–2075	1.32
1975–1980	3.84	2025–2030	2.02	2075–2080	1.26
1980–1985	3.59	2030–2035	1.95	2080–2085	1.25
1985–1990	3.39	2035–2040	1.82	2085–2090	1.24
1990–1995	3.04	2040–2045	1.74	2090–2095	1.24
1995–2000	2.79	2045–2050	1.67	2095–2100	1.23

I think this speaks for itself, but you can see that world fertility rates are declining. The average number of kids has been cut in half over the past 60 years. Obviously as the future predictions get farther out, their accuracy will most likely decrease, but the important part is the decline.
 
Now, according to the United Nations' World Population Prospects report, the world population is growing by about 74 million people a year ( Source and tons of info), by 2050 we will reach 9 billion people, assuming a decrease in TFR from 2.5 to 2.0. Some high end estimates have placed the population as high as 11 billion. 
 
"The highest rates of growth – global increases above 1.8% per year – were seen briefly during the 1950s, and for a longer period during the 1960s and 1970s. The growth rate peaked at 2.2% in 1963, and had declined to 1.1% by 2009. Annual births peaked at 173 million in the late 1990s, and are now expected to remain constant at their 2011 level of 134 million, while deaths number 56 million per year, and are expected to increase to 80 million per year by 2040" ( Source 1, Source 2)
 
Much of the modern industrialized world's population is expected to stay around the same, while some countries are expected to actually decline, like Russia or the Ukraine ( Excellent article and sources on that here)
 
On the other hand, nearly half (49%) of the expected population growth over the next 40 years is expected to come from Africa. Actually, African and Asian populations are the ones that are increasing, not the World's population. 

So what we have are some countries experiencing a rapid growth in population due to many of the same reasons that industrialized countries had during their growth. Mainly, "Dramatic reductions in mortality, with lagging reductions in fertility." (Harvard Economics & Demography Professor David Bloom, source)   Eventually these countries will reach a similar outcome and find a stable population that they can support properly and won't move very much from there, but they are currently experiencing a ton of growth like we did.   I could continue this all night really, there's a ton of information out there, information with science and facts, which you can read. The bottom line is that the population is increasing, but we are getting close to the maximum population the planet can support (Though this changes constantly as we get better technology or as we fuck up the planet more). I just hope you realize that your "Pure logic" is not any sort of logic at all. I think you are right that the world has many challenges going forwards from here, and hopefully we can figure out how to deal with them.

@fishmicmuffin said:

WE NEED TO GO TO SPAAAAAAAACE SPACE SPACE... SO MUCH SPACE... GOTTA SEE IT ALL

<Joker Voice>It's simple. We, uh, kill the people.</Joker Voice>

Seriously though, that's exact what will happen.

Some will just starve to death - those that are better off will of course secure their food supply.

Some will die of disease due to shortage of medicine - again those that are better off will secure required medical supplies.

Then there is war ... killing over resources is not new. The better armed people will use force to secure whatever resources they need while their governments invent propaganda to make them feel better about it as they do so.

Welcome to the Real World. It sucks balls. Enjoy your (relatively short) stay.

All the problems you listed will make sure the the population will plateau before that.

I thought I read somewhere that the global population will peak around 2050 as demand for resources outstrips the ability to supply them. It wouldn't surprise me it if did. Eventually we'll reach equilibrium or the sun will supernova. Either way, nothing you or I ever do will cause any significant effect.

That is a very good observation made a few posts ago.

@Xeiphyer: But fact is it's hard to predict the future, I'm taking into account probably more things than the UN is. They base their facts on how it looks right now. I base it on events that are probably going to happen in the future.

As you said Asia's population has increased a lot and is increasing a lot. China contains 1/5th of the world population, and it's not really "democractic". If china somehow decides to rebel against it's goverment and it's not a peaceful transition. Blood will spill and a lot of resourcers out of china will put other countries in problem.

One tiny little spark and there could be a new world war, maybe what we need? But today a lot of countries have nuclear weapons so a new world war would turn our planet into a post apocalyptic world.

This is very likely to happen especially since the conflict between religious and non religious people accelerate.

China's population is increasing, now let's look at Europe and Africa. Europe has during the last 20-25 years been invaded by muslims. And they breed faster than any other ethnic group. It has been predicted Sweden the most atheistic country in the world will have more than 50% muslims in 2050 due to how much more muslims breed in comparison to the native population.

People in Europe might not be breeding a lot today, but with more of Europe becoming ignorant and stupid, child births will increase. It's a fact educated secular people often have no children or very few children in comparison to idiots. So yes I think it's safe to assume Europe will in the next 30 years see a rapid increase in child births.

The middle east has always bred fast and will keep doing so I'm sure, I see no reason for them to stop. They have large families sometimes up to 8-10 children per family. Africa will breed a lot like they always do but their lack of food will keep their population at a steady rate. USA I have no real idea, I'm afraid that country with it's religious conflicts will start new wars...but only time will tell.

I can't tbh answer if the population will increase or decrease in America. Australia is more like a country than a continent, not really relevant. South America I think will keep growing, still I'm too lazy to look up statistics on this but I have no reason not to think that is the case.

So:

• Africa
• Asia
• Europe
• South America

Will probably incrase their populations, and it won't be smart people that breed while:

• America
• Australia
• Antarctica

Will either decrease their populations or stay where they are right now. With increased populations in Europe for example the conflict between the lower and upper classes will increase. I can't help but to think that at some point the lower classes of the world will rebel against the upper class. It has already started to happen in USA at wallstreet. It's just a matter of time before more people take to the street and we have war.

I'm sad to inform you that I think the situation looks very bleak, now I ask again what should we do to prevent this? Should we reform the scool system to turn people into less materialistic wolves. Should we force castration at early age? What should we do??

Technology is pretty crazy guys, I think we'll be good.

@Hermoor said:

I'm taking into account probably more things than the UN is

citizen-kane-clapping.gif

It took 5,000+ years to reach somewhere around 7 billion. (more than 1/7 of that lives in China)

You think you can cut that time down and increase the population by 13 billion in 40 years?

What is this..

Uhhh did this dude just say he is smarter than the UN?

Well il just watch the carnage unfold over here.*Takes cover in a Nuclear bunker*

@Still_I_Cry said:

It took 5,000+ years to reach somewhere around 7 billion. (more than 1/7 of that lives in China)

You think you can cut that time down and increase the population by 13 billion in 40 years?

What is this..

Actually the world population has increased steadily since the industalisation in the 18-19th century. It didn't take the world 5000+ years to become 7 billion. It all happened during a few centuries. Once again, we were 2 billion in 1950 and we are 7 billion today. If you can't accept that because of our modern life style we thrive...then you are clearly ignorant and in denial.

We are going to become more and that sooner than you think. It's up to the young people to introduce some revolutionary laws to prevent this. If we don't...and just follow in our parents and grandparents footsteps we will face the concquences. I can't help but to think that all you people that reply above are mindless sheep following your herder...(Older generation). It's time to leave your television and manga cartoons and start thinking independently.

Now I ask you once again what laws should we introduce in order to control the population. I suggest:

• Forced steralisation
• One child per family
• Reworked school system

Too bad the people who make our laws and controls the school are 150 kilo bald men and old hags. Better question yet, are you going to turn into old hags and bald people?

@Hermoor said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

It took 5,000+ years to reach somewhere around 7 billion. (more than 1/7 of that lives in China)

You think you can cut that time down and increase the population by 13 billion in 40 years?

What is this..

Actually the world population has increased steadily since the industalisation in the 18-19th century. It didn't take the world 5000+ years to become 7 billion. It all happened during a few centuries. Once again, we were 2 billion in 1950 and we are 7 billion today. If you can't accept that because of our modern life style we thrive...then you are clearly ignorant and in denial.

We are going to become more and that sooner than you think. It's up to the young people to introduce some revolutionary laws to prevent this. If we don't...and just follow in our parents and grandparents footsteps we will face the concquences. I can't help but to think that all you people that reply above are mindless sheep following your herder...(Older generation). It's time to leave your television and manga cartoons and start thinking independently.

Now I ask you once again what laws should we introduce in order to control the population. I suggest:

• Forced steralisation
• One child per family
• Reworked school system

Too bad the people who make our laws and controls the school are 150 kilo bald men and old hags. Better question yet, are you going to turn into old hags and bald people?

Well il gladly take the the bald men and old hags instead of you.

you really need to tone down on the Egotism there son. You arent that smart as you think you are.

women on top will be the new norm.

@niko555: Well il gladly take the the bald men and old hags instead of you.

Then face the concequences...

@Hermoor:I really hope he is trollin

Or i really think the human race wont even be here the next 50 years

(sorry for the wall of text, as I'm on a mobile) 20 billion? Not likely, as the developing world continues to develop. Look to the death bed demogrqphics of Europe, Russia, Japan, etc. They don't even breed at replacement rate, usually considered 2.1 births per couple. Even the US barely is at replacement rate, arguably reaching that in part through illegal immigration. This has profound implications for the viability of he social programs the aging populations have become accustomed to. The next 2-3 decades will be extremely interesting in terms of social upheaval. The real question is what the developing world does with that surplus man power before they do catch up. What does little Yemen do with it's comparatively youthful population? What does China do with it's surplus of men, that is the natural result of it's disastrous one child policy? As Mark Steyn put it, unless China has ambitions to become the first gay superpower since Sparta, there is a common historical use of an excess male population, and that is conquest. We may be in for interesting times indeed.

@Hermoor said:

@Still_I_Cry said:

It took 5,000+ years to reach somewhere around 7 billion. (more than 1/7 of that lives in China)

You think you can cut that time down and increase the population by 13 billion in 40 years?

What is this..

Actually the world population has increased steadily since the industalisation in the 18-19th century. It didn't take the world 5000+ years to become 7 billion. It all happened during a few centuries. Once again, we were 2 billion in 1950 and we are 7 billion today. If you can't accept that because of our modern life style we thrive...then you are clearly ignorant and in denial.

We are going to become more and that sooner than you think. It's up to the young people to introduce some revolutionary laws to prevent this. If we don't...and just follow in our parents and grandparents footsteps we will face the concquences. I can't help but to think that all you people that reply above are mindless sheep following your herder...(Older generation). It's time to leave your television and manga cartoons and start thinking independently.

Now I ask you once again what laws should we introduce in order to control the population. I suggest:

• Forced steralisation
• One child per family
• Reworked school system

Too bad the people who make our laws and controls the school are 150 kilo bald men and old hags. Better question yet, are you going to turn into old hags and bald people?

So in a few centuries we went from 0-7 billion?

Nope.

The population growth rate is also projected to be on the decline according to http://www.npg.org/facts/world_pop_year.htm

The source is theU.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Projections.

I suggest talking to China and India first. Their populations are respectively:

1	China	1,339,724,852	November 1, 2010	19.2%	Census result
2	India	1,210,193,422	March 1, 2011

I think China has a law regarding how many children one can have (unless I'm mistaken). Look how that has turned out.

Reworking the school system is going to achieve what?

Forced sterilization? You're joking right?

Also, my bad. I was wrong about 7 Billion. (Damn news)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

I never stated anything about modern lifestyle. Don't put my words in my mouth.

I feel that it is my obligation to laugh at your assertions regarding my lifestyle, as none of the things you stated apply to me.

The USA isn't anywhere near 1 billion yet.

I think we can safely say that the USA does not need to change a thing.

Alright, but just so we're clear, I'll be dead before all this happens, right? Cool.

I'm not sure how population growth or other factors will impact the numbers, but I'd just like to point out that the crime trend is in a decline around the world.

I know in Canada the declining crime rate has been documented, and in the US there are a number of sources:

Crime in the only remaining superpower is seen to be declining. In US, street crime hovers near historic lows – hence the declaration of certain analysts that life in US has never been safer. And with the apparently downward trend of criminal activities all over the world, the world appears to be a friendlier place – notwithstanding terrorism. This is in sharp contrast to the perception that the world is getting more dangerous everyday.

Source

There are also indications that crime in Europe (among other areas) is in a decline:

Source

Honduras and Jamaica still aren't the friendliest places though.

We're all going to be just fine, people.

@Hermoor said:

I was thinking about the future of our society. (Not a good idea)

In 1950 the world population was about 2.5 billion. 60 years later it's 7 billion. That is 2.8 times as much as it was in 1950. Now let's pretend our new superior technology that makes it possible for us to genetically enhance food will make it possible for us to grow even more.

2.8 times 7 billion is about 20 billion. Which means we will be 20 billion people on earth in about 40 years from now. If we look on the current problems we are facing in our world today.

the increase will be larger than by 2.8 times. its exponential.

WE NEED TO GO TO SPAAAAAAAACE  SPACE SPACE... SO MUCH SPACE... GOTTA SEE IT ALL

I am also smarter than the UN, and I'm definitely taking more things into consideration than they are, so everyone in the world is going to decide to have a baby making competition. Over the next 40 years the population will increase to 700 billion people. I don't need facts, because I'm smarter than the UN.

To be fair, all of human history has pretty much consisted of war, ignorance, disaster, and crime.

I'm taking into account probably more things than the UN is.