Comments on: World Population to Hit 9.2 Billion by 2050 http://iconnectdots.com/2007/03/world_populatio.html Guidance, Insight and Ideas in a Time of Accelerating Change Thu, 17 May 2012 14:33:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Bill http://iconnectdots.com/2007/03/world_populatio.html/comment-page-1#comment-811 Bill Sun, 25 Mar 2007 01:31:34 +0000 http://iconnectdots.com.s11974.gridserver.com/2007/03/world-population-to-hit-92-billion-by-2050.html#comment-811 Tom, there's plenty to round and round and round and round. Goldman Sachs paid $16 billion in xmas bonuses last year, so don't lay this "present generations" trip on me. It's about the distribution of wealth, the products of growth, and those products are being concentrated into ever more diminishing numbers of bank accounts, even within the west. But the west could set the world on a track of building more wealth for everyone if they gave a little more to get back a lot. The opportunity cost in terms of the lost human productivity in the developing world to malnutrition is staggering. Tomorrows markets are in the developing world. It is costing much more for us to ignore this problem than deal with it. Investment in people pays dividends. Just look at the Grameen Bank. Most western lenders would kill for a default rate on the microloans its been dishing to budding entrepreneurs who need say, US$50, to get started. I think countries like Brazil, India and China are going to make the 21st century their own by feeding, clothing, housing and employing as many people as we can all beget. As for entertaining all of them... I guess there's gotta be something left for America to do. Tom, there’s plenty to round and round and round and round. Goldman Sachs paid $16 billion in xmas bonuses last year, so don’t lay this “present generations” trip on me. It’s about the distribution of wealth, the products of growth, and those products are being concentrated into ever more diminishing numbers of bank accounts, even within the west. But the west could set the world on a track of building more wealth for everyone if they gave a little more to get back a lot. The opportunity cost in terms of the lost human productivity in the developing world to malnutrition is staggering. Tomorrows markets are in the developing world. It is costing much more for us to ignore this problem than deal with it. Investment in people pays dividends. Just look at the Grameen Bank. Most western lenders would kill for a default rate on the microloans its been dishing to budding entrepreneurs who need say, US$50, to get started.

I think countries like Brazil, India and China are going to make the 21st century their own by feeding, clothing, housing and employing as many people as we can all beget. As for entertaining all of them… I guess there’s gotta be something left for America to do.

]]> By: Tom http://iconnectdots.com/2007/03/world_populatio.html/comment-page-1#comment-810 Tom Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:39:38 +0000 http://iconnectdots.com.s11974.gridserver.com/2007/03/world-population-to-hit-92-billion-by-2050.html#comment-810 Er, Bill - you're on the right track pointing out that 18,000 kids die every day from malnutrition. Why this is not on the front page of every newspaper every day I do not know, it's got to be the most appalling tragedy and leaves things like tsunamis and 9/11s in the shade. But no-one appears to give a stuff, so good on you for caring! With world population set to continue growing, this level of human misery can only increase. While there might be enough wealth and resources "to go around three times" that is only for present generations. If this generation uses up everything there will be nothing left for the tens of millions who will come after. If the human race is to live sustainably, i.e. to leave enough for future generations, it must reduce its numbers to around 2.5 billion, which it was only in 1950. If we assume the population replaces itself every 70 years, it would mean the difference between finding enough to feed, clothe house and entertain at least 18 billion people, or only 5 billion people, during the next 140 years. Which world would YOU rather live in? Er, Bill – you’re on the right track pointing out that 18,000 kids die every day from malnutrition. Why this is not on the front page of every newspaper every day I do not know, it’s got to be the most appalling tragedy and leaves things like tsunamis and 9/11s in the shade. But no-one appears to give a stuff, so good on you for caring! With world population set to continue growing, this level of human misery can only increase. While there might be enough wealth and resources “to go around three times” that is only for present generations. If this generation uses up everything there will be nothing left for the tens of millions who will come after. If the human race is to live sustainably, i.e. to leave enough for future generations, it must reduce its numbers to around 2.5 billion, which it was only in 1950. If we assume the population replaces itself every 70 years, it would mean the difference between finding enough to feed, clothe house and entertain at least 18 billion people, or only 5 billion people, during the next 140 years. Which world would YOU rather live in?

]]> By: Bill http://iconnectdots.com/2007/03/world_populatio.html/comment-page-1#comment-809 Bill Mon, 19 Mar 2007 20:51:59 +0000 http://iconnectdots.com.s11974.gridserver.com/2007/03/world-population-to-hit-92-billion-by-2050.html#comment-809 Interesting. Yes, just abt all that 3bn increase will be in the developing world and all of it will be in urban conglomerations. The sick joke is there's enough resources and wealth to go around three times, it's the distribution that's the problem. The west is too fat, too selfish and too greedy. Tough luck starving millions! Did you know 18,000 kids die everyday from malnutrition? Now that's what I call social networking, huh? Interesting. Yes, just abt all that 3bn increase will be in the developing world and all of it will be in urban conglomerations. The sick joke is there’s enough resources and wealth to go around three times, it’s the distribution that’s the problem. The west is too fat, too selfish and too greedy. Tough luck starving millions! Did you know 18,000 kids die everyday from malnutrition? Now that’s what I call social networking, huh?

]]>