What do you think the population of the USA should be?

ecofarm said:

China does as well.

Click to expand...

brothern said:

It does not.

Click to expand...

:mrgreen:

joko104 said:

I think the Democratic Party wants at least 1 billion more, with the provision that all are either Latino or Muslim, with white people banned from immigration. To the Democratic Party, "diversity" means Latino and Muslims only.

Click to expand...

Clearly your thinking is flawed on this issue.

brothern said:

As it follows, your argument would be that the United States as well has an inverted age distribution?

Click to expand...

America's pyramid is a pyramid. It doesn't get larger as it goes up. Smaller as it goes up is normal. Larger as it goes up (in age) is inverted. Inverted is when many old people rely on few young workers. It doesn't work. It's a big problem. Youth don't like all of their earnings going to old people.

as a rule Nature has a way of controlling population... you ever notice the plague is always in populated areas people get sick and die but some always survive ..

azgreg said:

:mrgreen:

Click to expand...

I'm correct. There is no doubt. Read the graphics.

The reasons I cite for China's inversion are also correct. There is no doubt.

ecofarm said:

America's pyramid is a pyramid. It doesn't get larger as it goes up. Smaller as it goes up is normal. Larger as it goes up (in age) is inverted. Inverted is when many old people rely on few young workers. It doesn't work. It's a big problem. Youth don't like all of their earnings going to old people.

Click to expand...

Oh my mistake. You're right, ecofarm. America's pyramid is a pyramid. See how the lines show America's pyramid not getting larger as it goes up.

Very expert grad-school informed call. Maybe Trump should hire you as his official crowd size estimator. :roll:

brothern said:

Oh my mistake. You're right, ecofarm. America's pyramid is a pyramid. See how the lines show America's pyramid not getting larger as it goes up.

Very expert grad-school informed call. Maybe Trump should hire you as his official crowd size estimator. :roll:

View attachment 67250860

Click to expand...

Don't act stupid. Compare the pyramids.

You were wrong. Deal with it.

ecofarm said:

Don't act stupid. Look at the pyramids.

You were wrong. Deal with it.

Click to expand...

I'm not acting stupid. You're right. America's age distribution does look like a pyramid that skews towards the youth.

See:



Looks exactly like a typical pyramidal shape. I was totally wrong and I am dealing with it by giving you all the credit:

azgreg said:

Click to expand...

I love this.

brothern said:

I'm not acting stupid. You're right. America's age distribution does look like a pyramid that skews towards the youth.

See:

View attachment 67250861

Looks exactly like a typical pyramidal shape. I was totally wrong:

View attachment 67250862

Click to expand...

It has to do it for a period of time. You're totally ignorant and pretending to have a point.

Just admit you were wrong and I was right.

China has a population inversion, the US does not. Deal with reality.

ecofarm said:

It has to do it for a period of time. You're totally ignorant and pretending to have a point.

Just admit you were wrong and I was right.

Click to expand...

I am wrong. You were right. :roll:

brothern said:

I am wrong. You were right. :roll:

Click to expand...

For a population to be considered inverted, it must occur over a period of time and to an extent.

China has an inverted population.

The US does not.

Look it up and stop trying to pretend you have an education on the subject.

chuckiechan said:

So what's your number?

Click to expand...

The United States has plenty of room to grow if you consider the number of small to median sized cities as well as rusted out areas of the country like the midwest that could expand.
However the issue at hand in the United States is two-fold if you consider current housing trends,

1. American youth are driving towards large cities (NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston) which is severely impacting housing costs.
2. Housing in small and median sized cities has been traditionally suburb-style or exurbs which would reach a breaking point of available land with an influx of new immigrants.

Meaning I would be all for migration-driven population growth, ca 25% growth to 400m, but it would have to done in partnership with local municipalities and states in a manner that incentives dense growth in small to median sized cities.

As for the merits of increasing the population, I feel that it meritorious if we target individuals who are willing to provide labor and skills to industries that are facing gaps.

ttwtt78640 said:

I guess that my point is basically - can GDP grow without a growing population?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure it can. I feel that continual GDP growth is an economic assumption that will start to peter out within my lifetime. The first glimpse of this was the Great Depression, where production capacity in some industries first surpassed total feasible consumption. It caused a lot of confusion and economic distraught as farmers who only ever knew the strategy of maximizing production weren't able to continue without causing their crops to become worthless.

Now as we drive towards automation and renewables, which don't have sizable input costs, the fixed costs of production will decrease as capacity increases. If we maintain the same population and are constrained to our current habitable environment, at some point I feel we'll reach a situation where on the broad economic level, we won't be wanting or having the ability to consume more.

I think we'll be able to buy some time if we saw an increase in population.

chuckiechan said:

If history is any guide, the population will be in the big cities and the food will still be grown in the country. So we need to grow and move a hell of a lot of food, not to mention cooking, eating, and getting rid of garbage and sewage. Then we have to get people to and from work and school.

Click to expand...

Agriculture policies in the United States would have to change and it'd cause a lot of disruption and angry interest groups.
We pour billions into the production of corn and grains that which are NOT consumed by people, but used in renewable fuels and meat production.

It's something like 40-50% of corn produced in the United States is used in ethanol, which is actually pretty ridiculous.
If that were flipped to subsidies of food that's actually consumed by people - fruits, veggies, nuts, etc. - you'd more than likely see a severe increase in total food production.

chuckiechan said:

The best US population estimate today is 328,233,846.

The reason I wonder is that there is an environment cost to population, and a social cost, and those topics are often the news de jure.

Where are you going to live, how are you going to live, and what kind of infrastructure will be need to accommodate everyone.

If history is any guide, the population will be in the big cities and the food will still be grown in the country. So we need to grow and move a hell of a lot of food, not to mention cooking, eating, and getting rid of garbage and sewage. Then we have to get people to and from work and school.

So what's your number?

Click to expand...

This is what the deniers on the left don't understand. Fact is, even with zero people on the planet, global temps would still rise. Everything about people that there is, every single aspect, helps increase climate change and unless someone is willing to suggest culling huge numbers of people, like millions or even billions, climate change is going to eventually get the planet (even if we cull everyone). I say we live our lives and adapt to climate change as best as we can and when the Earth ends, it ends. No matter what we do, humanity is more than likely going to come to an end at some point. Our sun will go supernova and if we begin to live on other planets or even in other solar systems, another galaxy is on collision course for our own at some far point in the future and maybe even at some point when the universe expands as far as it can, it will all eventually collapse on itself and we have yet another big bang. I don't expect us to survive any of that.

ecofarm said:

Japan has 10x our population density. Most or all of Europe is 3x or more our population density. To be at Japan's pop density, we'd need about 3.5 billion. Europe's would be a billion.

If they can do it, we can, right?

Click to expand...

You're sounding like it should be a race for more people, kinda like the more the better.

Get real! New Jersey where I grew up has a population density higher per sq/mile than even Japan.
Japan 903, New Jersey 1210. The USA should never have had the population it currently shelters.
The ideal population was reached during LBJ's term in office around 200 million. I recall Johnson
suggesting that his newly born grandson was the 200 millionth.

Eisenhower’s & Kennedy's America was a nation of 160 million with a European Christian core and a culture uniquely its own. The
USA was a country then. What will hold this country together if we don't control both legal & illegal immigration.
It will become a stew of 450 million of every creed culture & color from every country on earth.

100 years ago Teddy Roosevelt of Rushmore fame spelled it out and became a prophet:
'The one absolute certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation
at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationaliities’ That's what the USA has become!

1945-1970 was a period when the USA was at the top of the world. '3/4 of all the cars driven in the world were driven on
USA roads. Pennsylvania still produced 45% of the steel produced in the entire world. America's ethnic mix was
88% European ethnics and 11% black.'

slick said:

You're sounding like it should be a race for more people, kinda like the more the better.

Get real! New Jersey where I grew up has a population density higher per sq/mile than even Japan.
Japan 903, New Jersey 1210. The USA should never have had the population it currently shelters.
The ideal population was reached during LBJ's term in office around 200 million. I recall Johnson
suggesting that his newly born grandson was the 200 millionth.

Eisenhower’s & Kennedy's America was a nation of 160 million with a European Christian core and a culture uniquely its own. The
USA was a country then. What will hold this country together if we don't control both legal & illegal immigration.
It will become a stew of 450 million of every creed culture & color from every country on earth.

100 years ago Teddy Roosevelt of Rushmore fame spelled it out and became a prophet:
'The one absolute certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation
at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationaliities’ That's what the USA has become!

1945-1970 was a period when the USA was at the top of the world. '3/4 of all the cars driven in the world were driven on
USA roads. Pennsylvania still produced 45% of the steel produced in the entire world. America's ethnic mix was
88% European ethnics and 11% black.'

Click to expand...

I'm saying it was one thing when peacenik lazy hippies freaked out about population. But conservatives joining the wailing is too much.

When will The Population Bomb be required reading in business departments?

Chicken Littles ****ing everywhere.

Am I wrong to assume this thread is yet another thinly veiled opposition to immigration?

What's the ideal U.S. population...how they **** would anyone answer that? People can't even admit Trump is a moron, and you want them to figure out ideal population of a nation? Good luck.

brothern said:

I'm not acting stupid. You're right. America's age distribution does look like a pyramid that skews towards the youth.

See:

View attachment 67250861

Looks exactly like a typical pyramidal shape. I was totally wrong and I am dealing with it by giving you all the credit:

View attachment 67250862

Click to expand...

chuckiechan said:

The best US population estimate today is 328,233,846.

The reason I wonder is that there is an environment cost to population, and a social cost, and those topics are often the news de jure.

Where are you going to live, how are you going to live, and what kind of infrastructure will be need to accommodate everyone.

If history is any guide, the population will be in the big cities and the food will still be grown in the country. So we need to grow and move a hell of a lot of food, not to mention cooking, eating, and getting rid of garbage and sewage. Then we have to get people to and from work and school.

So what's your number?

Click to expand...

We need to build up instead of sprawling outward. Highrises is where peope need to live to grow populations. Eventually there will be a point where farms reach capacity and thats the cap.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

chuckiechan said:

The best US population estimate today is 328,233,846.

The reason I wonder is that there is an environment cost to population, and a social cost, and those topics are often the news de jure.

Where are you going to live, how are you going to live, and what kind of infrastructure will be need to accommodate everyone.

If history is any guide, the population will be in the big cities and the food will still be grown in the country. So we need to grow and move a hell of a lot of food, not to mention cooking, eating, and getting rid of garbage and sewage. Then we have to get people to and from work and school.

So what's your number?

Click to expand...

joko104 said:

I think the Democratic Party wants at least 1 billion more, with the provision that all are either Latino or Muslim, with white people banned from immigration. To the Democratic Party, "diversity" means Latino and Muslims only.

Click to expand...

Lord Tammerlain said:

But should that be a goal?

Is a huge population by itself a desirable goal.

Click to expand...

ecofarm said:

I'm saying it was one thing when peacenik lazy hippies freaked out about population. But conservatives joining the wailing is too much.

When will The Population Bomb be required reading in business departments?

Chicken Littles ****ing everywhere.

Click to expand...

Mach said:

Am I wrong to assume this thread is yet another thinly veiled opposition to immigration?

What's the ideal U.S. population...how they **** would anyone answer that? People can't even admit Trump is a moron, and you want them to figure out ideal population of a nation? Good luck.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

By the end of the 21st Century, civilization will have already begun experiencing population awareness at which time the rate of that awareness will continue to grow exponentially, but the time to stop it will have expired.

For hundreds of millions of people around the world, migration will have become a matter of survival rather than for freedom, opportunity, prosperity, or happiness.

This is the world we're about to pass to our children and grandchildren unless we put an end to all establishment and progressive politics immediately and terminate political correctness now.

If the US and Canada could come to a bilateral agreement to drastically reduce immigration; the unique geography of North America would make it fairly easy for them to eliminate most illegal migration.

We're now on the technological brink of automating many of our factories and businesses which will eliminate the need for most unskilled labor allowing us to sustain or even grow our economy.

If Australia takes the same measures, along with its unique geography also, it would escape the catastrophe as well but Europe would no doubt be overrun by a mass 3rd world invasion.

The only hope the planet has to survive a population catastrophe is Western Civilization but only if it doesn't get caught up in the middle of the problem itself.

Does anybody out there agree with me?

Empirica said:

By the end of the 21st Century, civilization will have already begun experiencing population awareness at which time the rate of that awareness will continue to grow exponentially, but the time to stop it will have expired.

For hundreds of millions of people around the world, migration will have become a matter of survival rather than for freedom, opportunity, prosperity, or happiness.

This is the world we're about to pass to our children and grandchildren unless we put an end to all establishment and progressive politics immediately and terminate political correctness now.

If the US and Canada could come to a bilateral agreement to drastically reduce immigration; the unique geography of North America would make it fairly easy for them to eliminate most illegal migration.

We're now on the technological brink of automating many of our factories and businesses which will eliminate the need for most unskilled labor allowing us to sustain or even grow our economy.

If Australia takes the same measures, along with its unique geography also, it would escape the catastrophe as well but Europe would no doubt be overrun by a mass 3rd world invasion.

The only hope the planet has to survive a population catastrophe is Western Civilization but only if it doesn't get caught up in the middle of the problem itself.

Does anybody out there agree with me?

Click to expand...

Every dumbass overreacting world saving freshman environmental studies student hippie agrees with you. A little knowledge is dangerous.

Empirica said:

By the end of the 21st Century, civilization will have already begun experiencing population awareness at which time the rate of that awareness will continue to grow exponentially, but the time to stop it will have expired.

For hundreds of millions of people around the world, migration will have become a matter of survival rather than for freedom, opportunity, prosperity, or happiness.

This is the world we're about to pass to our children and grandchildren unless we put an end to all establishment and progressive politics immediately and terminate political correctness now.

If the US and Canada could come to a bilateral agreement to drastically reduce immigration; the unique geography of North America would make it fairly easy for them to eliminate most illegal migration.

We're now on the technological brink of automating many of our factories and businesses which will eliminate the need for most unskilled labor allowing us to sustain or even grow our economy.

If Australia takes the same measures, along with its unique geography also, it would escape the catastrophe as well but Europe would no doubt be overrun by a mass 3rd world invasion.

The only hope the planet has to survive a population catastrophe is Western Civilization but only if it doesn't get caught up in the middle of the problem itself.

Does anybody out there agree with me?

Click to expand...

I applaud your courage in posting an opinion that will probably get you burned at the stake for being politically correct.

Humanity has a tendency to go along, get along, until they get tired of it and en mass go crazy. Genocide, Nazism, riots, insurrections, etc. Or nature has enough and squirts out a disastrous disease or event. Just give it time. When the democrats can't get good jobs because they aren't bi or tri lingual, then it will get important.

Empirica said:

Does anybody out there agree with me?

Click to expand...

I hope not.

A certain population shouldn't be a goal of the US. I say that whatever happens happens.

I don't like any of the poll options. I think the ideal population for the US is approx 15% less than it is today. Every one of your options increases the population.