GarryP

Our society, since about the 16th century, has been built on continued expansion and growth. No growth means no interest, which means no banking as we know it. It also means no population growth either, which means explicit or implicit control of fertility.

In short, it's easier for the world society to crash than it is to get from here to a 'no growth' world.

The agent of the crash and rebalancing of population is likely to be disease/food - wars really don't cut it when you are looking at population numbers (remember the post war baby boomers).

However, it's pretty unlikely we would learn any lessons, even after a crash. The one that 'cheats' and goes for growth will outcompete the one that doesn't.

In short, we're screwed.

balkanghost

Bit pessimistic and wishing for catastrophe?

paulry

No need to wish for one. Humanity's inability to deal with the population explosion means it's coming sooner or later - regardless of any other measures that are taken

balkanghost

I'd get your laughing gear round this from Prof. Ian Goldin, it's not doom and gloom, and for most countries they will be desperate for workers etc. within a generation when ageing and declining populations kick in:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ian-...b_1064352.html

However, the doom and gloom comes from Sustainable Population Australia, Stable Population Party, Population Matters UK and offshoots of Zero Population Group in the USA, all are influenced by one man, John Tanton, the racist founder of the modern anti immigration movement.