Global demographic decline - what does it mean?

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216




The above story points to how the global population will decline soon. Countries like Japan, Spain, Italy etc are set to see their populations half by the end of the century. The lack of youth will also mean that pensions will not be as we know them today. Some problems like housing should be resolved however. Africa is one of the few places expected to increase its population. Will it get it’s act together and finally do something and be the global motor of 2100?

I see the western “pension era” being replaced with something else. Will global power change ? The USA only has 330m people but still dominates the planet, as did the small island of the UK, so maybe population number isn’t important?
 


parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,841
Africa is the big exception.

Some estimates say Africa could nearly triple its population this century.

There is likely to be a huge wave of migration from Africa into the regions which are losing population, primarily Europe.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,577
It absolutely does not point to a global decline. It points to 8.8 billion by 2100. That's a 13% increase on today. It's not a bad thing we're beginning to slow down, we've doubled the population in 40 years.

There are too many humans on the planet already. Food supplies are under threat, the impacts on the environment are increasing. A decrease would be a net positive.
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
Europe and Japan would be a lot more pleasant if they went back to 1900 levels. Young families would have a better accommodation choices and wouldn't have to follow the stupid trend of starting families late 30's and 40's
 

Catapulta

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2020
Messages
371
It absolutely does not point to a global decline. It points to 8.8 billion by 2100. That's a 13% increase on today. It's not a bad thing we're beginning to slow down, we've doubled the population in 40 years.

There are too many humans on the planet already. Food supplies are under threat, the impacts on the environment are increasing. A decrease would be a net positive.
There are too many humans on the planet already. Food supplies are under threat, the impacts on the environment are increasing. A decrease would be a net positive.

They were saying that 50 years ago too!:)
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
8,556
Africa is the big exception.

Some estimates say Africa could nearly triple its population this century.

There is likely to be a huge wave of migration from Africa into the regions which are losing population, primarily Europe.

But with robots and AI, what will they do?

You could run europe with 5m people, thinly spread. We don't provide anything the world needs that it can't get somewhere else.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
It absolutely does not point to a global decline. It points to 8.8 billion by 2100. That's a 13% increase on today. It's not a bad thing we're beginning to slow down, we've doubled the population in 40 years.

There are too many humans on the planet already. Food supplies are under threat, the impacts on the environment are increasing. A decrease would be a net positive.
It predicts that the growth we’ve had for a long time will stop and will then decline.
Disagree re food supply - technology has gotten better and better to meet our demands.
You have a point re the planet. A smaller population should produce less waste than a larger one.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
The mid term effect will be that immigration from Africa in larger numbers will benefit everyone. As time goes by they will rise to senior roles as they make up a higher percentage of European work forces. Whether this produces more racism “taking our jobs” or less racism as seen to be smart enough to run companies is unknown. Will hopefully result in the Africans doing well here learning the European/American business skills and culture and bringing them back to Africa to improve their culture.

This could be the biggest shift in Europe since Africans emigrated from their continent to Europe about 100,000 years ago .
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,911
It predicts that the growth we’ve had for a long time will stop and will then decline.
Disagree re food supply - technology has gotten better and better to meet our demands.
You have a point re the planet. A smaller population should produce less waste than a larger one.
Energy supply and tech will be different, 2100 I'd wager will largely be a nuclear electric economy
 

Ardillaun

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
13,234
I don’t pay a great deal of attention to Nigerian politics, so I was pleased to see their president at least acknowledging the problem:

President Muhammadu Buhari on Monday described the country’s burgeoning population as “frightening.”

He urged ministers-designates to join hands in finding solution to the worrisome trend.

Speaking at the commencement of a two-day retreat for ministers-designate in Abuja yesterday, the president said: “By average estimates, our population is close to 200 million today. By 2050, UN (United Nations) estimates show that Nigeria will be third globally, behind only India and China with a projected population of 411 million.
Words are nice, action is better and results are best but we’re not seeing much of the latter two on this file. It’s something that should be at the top of any agenda when talking to that government. Upping the age girls get married in Nigeria would be a start. It’s absurdly low at the moment, especially in the north.


 
Last edited:

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
53,536
I don’t pay a great deal of attention to Nigerian politics, so I was pleased to see their president at least acknowledging the problem:



Words are nice, action is better and results are best but we’re not seeing much of the latter two on this file. It’s something that should be at the top of any agenda when talking to that government. Upping the age girls get married in Nigeria would be a start. It’s absurdly low at the moment, especially in the north.


Empowering women, making sure they complete education to the hghest level, professional opportunities for women and gender diversity in political leadership (local and national) is the quickest way to reduce birth-rate.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
Empowering women, making sure they complete education to the hghest level, professional opportunities for women and gender diversity in political leadership (local and national) is the quickest way to reduce birth-rate.
This is true. Not sure that it is bad though. Change generally produces opportunities, winners and losers. The biggest danger is that the population currently predicted to grow is growing because it is a bit backward. However as their importance on the planet grows will humanity slow its progress or even decline into famines and war which Africa is synonymous with?
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
53,536
This is true. Not sure that it is bad though. Change generally produces opportunities, winners and losers. The biggest danger is that the population currently predicted to grow is growing because it is a bit backward. However as their importance on the planet grows will humanity slow its progress or even decline into famines and war which Africa is synonymous with?
Making people less poor (higher incomes, better medical services) does work ... Some reasons that poor families have more children are:
  • The usual one of lack of birth control, low women empowerment etc
  • A high infant mortality tends to push families to having more children while the woman is fertile because they represent extra labour. Coldly, poor families in some countries can also earn cash by selling the labour of their sons, or selling daughters into marriages or prostitution.
  • On a human level, it is spreading their bets, if they know that up to half their children may not live beyond infancy.
In the modern world, high population growth is sign of continued poverty and backwardness, not of future power.
 
Last edited:

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
53,536
I notice there are some success stories in the statistics ...
  • China, currently the world's most populous with 1.4b people, will drop to 3rd with 0.72b.
  • Indonesia, currently 4th with 0.26b will drop to 7th with 0.23b. A success from a Muslim country.
  • Similarly, Bangladesh now 8th with 0.157b will drop to 25th with 0.81b. A halving of the population.
The biggest risers are India, which will be the world's most populous country in 2100 with 1.1b people, and a list of African countries - Nigeria, Congo, Ethiopia, Egypt, and Tanzania. Pakistan's population will drop slightly, and it will remain the world's 5th largest by population.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
Will world power shift with numbers ? The USA only has about 4% of the population so maybe not. The biggest positive may be less people looking for water.
 

Barroso

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
6,025
Europe and Japan would be a lot more pleasant if they went back to 1900 levels. Young families would have a better accommodation choices and wouldn't have to follow the stupid trend of starting families late 30's and 40's
Undoubtedly.
Apart from Germany's long history of being a well-organised, highly industrialised country there is one other reason for it's current level of wealth. That reson is its slow population growth, meaning that the amount of investment needed in housing and education remained low in comparison to other European countries; about 15% since 1960, compared to 20% in Italy, 27% for the UK, around 50% for France and 65% for Spain.
Of course all countries have become wealthier over the period, but families and the young in general in Germany have eaten a considerably smaller part of the national cake than has been the case for most other countries.
 

Barroso

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
6,025
Will world power shift with numbers ? The USA only has about 4% of the population so maybe not. The biggest positive may be less people looking for water.
Power has followed population in the past, although numbers require a functioning industrial economy to translate into power.
Remember that France was the most powerful country in Europe for centuries prior to Napoleon.
Power then shifted to Germany and Britain, which industrialised rapidly with fast-growing populations throughout the 19th century. Power then shifted to the US and the USSR, with their ever-larger populations and industrial capacity.
In our lifetimes, we have seen the apparently unassailable position of the US after the demise of the Soviet Union become challenged by China as it has industrialised. China is now the economic powerhouse of the world, and the most populous country. The US has dropped back, and its military hegemony will decline as it retrenches - cutting foreign bases one by one - over the next twenty years.
 

toughbutfair

Well-known member
Joined
May 28, 2009
Messages
11,216
Power has followed population in the past, although numbers require a functioning industrial economy to translate into power.
Remember that France was the most powerful country in Europe for centuries prior to Napoleon.
Power then shifted to Germany and Britain, which industrialised rapidly with fast-growing populations throughout the 19th century. Power then shifted to the US and the USSR, with their ever-larger populations and industrial capacity.
In our lifetimes, we have seen the apparently unassailable position of the US after the demise of the Soviet Union become challenged by China as it has industrialised. China is now the economic powerhouse of the world, and the most populous country. The US has dropped back, and its military hegemony will decline as it retrenches - cutting foreign bases one by one - over the next twenty years.
I don’t believe that the USA became the global power due to immigration, I believe that people emigrated to the USA because it was growing.

Likewise, the 330m people in the USA still produce greater GDP than the 1.4bn Chinese.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom