Is the world over populated? Or poorly managed?

[Darth Reven82]

So, is the world overcrowded? Is there simply too many human beings on this planet? Could this be a lie? Could the world simply be simply poorly managed? Let's perform some simply mathematics to see.

Let's begin with the world's current population. There are 6,756,108,950 people on the entire planet at the moment I typed this. There's about 57,491,000 square miles of land on the planet.

6,756,108,950/57,491,000 = 117.51594075594440869005583482632,

That rounds to 118. That means that there are about 118 people per square mile on this planet. Almost certainly you can fit more than 118 people in a mile.

Let's move on to housing. An American home, on average, is about 2400 square feet, 3000 with a yard, and there are 27,878,400 square feet in a square mile. 27878400/3000 = 9292.8, rounds to 9300. In one square mile you can fit 9300 average American homes, which are pretty good compared to what the majority of the world lives in.

The United States – It has 3,718,695 square miles of land.

3,718,695 X 9300 = 34,583,863,500

You could fit over 30 billion homes in the United States, meaning 30 billion people, every person has a house to himself, could fit in the United States. Now, cons

The Earth's land area covers 57,491,000 square miles.

57,491,000 X 9200 = 534,666,300,000

Over 500 billion people could fit on the planet and each person can still have a house to himself. That's half a trillion people.
Now this number gets multiplied by about 5, because homes have 5 people on average. When you do this you can see that about 3,000,000,000,000 people could fit on the planet.



---

So, what do you people think about this?

 

[Ripper]

You're assuming of course that you can live anywhere aren't you? Who want's to live in the Sahara?

A quarter of the world isn't really suitable to live on (not including the water obvioulsy) due to lack of resources etc.

 

[wakachamo]

It's both overpopulated and poorly managed.

 

[Darth Reven82]

You're assuming of course that you can live anywhere aren't you? Who want's to live in the Sahara?

A quarter of the world isn't really suitable to live on (not including the water obvioulsy) due to lack of resources etc.

I'm not actually considering shoving everyone into one area.

As for the Sahara, people already live there. It'd be more comfortable, however, if they had roofs over their heads, and most likely the buildings would have air conditioning and things like that.

As for the ocean, it wouldn't be impossible to build communities on the sea. You should probably research the Venus Project or something, which is where I got the idea in the first place.

 

[Working Class Hero]

It's both and anyone can see that.

Poorly managed- Daily we are pumping tons of CO2 into our atmosphere. Not to mention polluting the oceans, land, air.

Overpopulated- We are using up resources faster than the Earth can replace them. :\ And the fact where in some places it is so crowded people die. :\

 

[.inLOVE]

It's screwed up. That's all I can say.

 

[Candace]

I live in one of the largest countries in Europe, yet we're only 14 million people (about 2 million here in the big city). Our country is 531,794 km² and the 4th largest country in Europe

Yet it's heavily un-populated if you look at much smaller countries like the UK which has no less than 60 million people
​

 

[Guillermo]

It's overpopulated, poorly managed and one heck of a war zone. Everyday we have problems in life, problems lead to problems, but nothing ever gets done. The troops in Iraq for example. We've been saying for countless years they will be free, but are they? No. I know there was a contract signed to have them out by 2011, but... they should be out by now.

Everyday we are pumping gases into our world, killing animals and the like. It's terrible. Jails are becoming full, people are just becoming careless and it needs to be solved.

 

[~Kavin~]

Clearly both. Man this world is so messed up, I bet our founding fathers would be like wtf?

 

[BakingBluePotatoe]

It's overpopulated, poorly managed and one heck of a war zone. Everyday we have problems in life, problems lead to problems, but nothing ever gets done. The troops in Iraq for example. We've been saying for countless years they will be free, but are they? No. I know there was a contract signed to have them out by 2011, but... they should be out by now.

Everyday we are pumping gases into our world, killing animals and the like. It's terrible. Jails are becoming full, people are just becoming careless and it needs to be solved.

Pretty much it. And I'm pretty sure we'll have a repeat of the Great Depression soon...

 

[.emerald]

I would have to say both. And because of our carelessness, WE are slowly dying(including our home.)

 

[Kura]

You can't link up humans side by side and figure that's how people can live on a planet.
Are you forgetting the fact that there's vast areas of water that can't be populated? the fact that there are deserts and trees and animals that need their own space to even breed, eat, and BREATHE?

It's a bit of both, really. I think they should kill off all the convicts and people who really aren't doing anything good in the community and have done bad in the world.

 

[Careful With That Axe Pichu!]

I think they should kill off all the convicts and people who really aren't doing anything good in the community and have done bad in the world.

What the heck? What next, should we colonize Saturn? Or should we clone Bono?

Why don't you make that your Christmas wish, while you're at it?

 

[Melody]

Honestly, I don't think the world is overpopulated yet. Maybe in 2525.... but definitely not now.

 

[♣Gawain♣]

Both. Overpopulated plus poor management can make it look really really overpopulated. Maybe people should move to Antarctica or to the moon.

 

[Cid]

Wow. Is that Pi?

Anyway, I'd say the same thing that most people above me said. Both.

Why?

Probably because of the same reasons already explained above.

 

[LethalTexture]

I'd disagree that the world is overly populated. Sure, almost seven billion people is a vast number, but there is alot of unenhabited land on this planet (whether it is actually habitable or not is another question, however). The world's population is forever growing; more people are been born than die, and I can't see the population becoming a problem for another 500 - 1000 years at least.

On the other point, I truly agree. I'm not sure that there are many countries in the world that have an able government.

And because of our carelessness, WE are slowly dying(including our home.)

I suppose you refer to global warming? Disagree. We are contributing, yes, but it's making hardly any difference at all. No matter what mankind does, the Earth is still going to heat up, even if the Earth went zero carbon emissions. The Earth is in a natural cycle, still heating up after the Ice Age.

All this scientific evidence is being ignored, that's what annoys me about this "green" propaganda.

 

[Legobricks]

Nature's more evident way of managing humans is to give them one child per birth cycle, and to make this childbirth comparatively dangerous in the first place; this has failed since we developed medicine.
I believe medical advances to be what has led to the Earth's population becoming how large it is today. In all nature's way, we're not supposed to wash our hands, not supposed to cure diseases, not supposed to... you know, live. Something as simple as a broken leg (where the bone comes out through the skin) should really be the end of us, once the onset of infection occurs.
It's become some kind of taboo for us to speak of death, but naturally we should be dropping left right and centre to things which today are considered petty.

Once upon a time, being 40 meant you were probably the oldest in your village. Nowadays you can be 100 and still able to walk.


It's a horrific notion to many, but sometime in our history it may be best to start culling ourselves; we're already cutting down vast areas of forest simply to feed ourselves.
Still, I think WWIII will do that for us before long.

I suppose you refer to global warming? Disagree. We are contributing, yes, but it's making hardly any difference at all. No matter what mankind does, the Earth is still going to heat up, even if the Earth went zero carbon emissions. The Earth is in a natural cycle, still heating up after the Ice Age.

I'd like to add to that, that whether we burn all the resources fastly or slowly we're still going to burn it all anyway, so the whole 'reducing of emissions to save the planet' crap falls flat on its face.

 

[Rogue planet]

I suppose you refer to global warming? Disagree. We are contributing, yes, but it's making hardly any difference at all. No matter what mankind does, the Earth is still going to heat up, even if the Earth went zero carbon emissions. The Earth is in a natural cycle, still heating up after the Ice Age.

All this scientific evidence is being ignored, that's what annoys me about this "green" propaganda.

Nicely put.

No I don't think the world is overcrowded; one could say a city or even a country is overcrowded but it's a stretch to say that the world is overcrowded, we havn't had to resort to floating citys yet.
500 years ago things like the plague would cut the population down for us, but as Cassino said we now have medicine; can we justify not saving lifes in order to decrease the population now that we have the medical knowledge? I don't think so. But the world will go on and something dramatic will happen to cut down the population; be it WWIII or a new pandemic.

 

[Mitchman]

I say both. In a way. We pollute and kill or planet everyday and some countries are over populated or have to many of one ethnic group. Im talking about china people. 1.5 billion out of 5.5 billion is a tad much no? I lvoe there country and there customs and everything about them except population.