Economic crisis slows U.S. population growth
By Haya El Nasser, USA TODAY
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-02-16/us-population-growth-slows/53157486/1
Updated 2/20/2012 12:38 PM
By: Aidan Knox
| This is a picture of the United States and shows the states that have lost and gained populations. |
Summary-
The
U.S. population is growing at its slowest since the Great Depression after
years of nonstop population’s increases.
For two year since 2009 the population growth was .7% a year. It has never been this low since the
1930’s. In the year of 2010-2011 the
population grew 2.2 million. The
government says that the population percentage decrease is from the
recession. The economy has improved
though but its effects are still present.
For example the numbers of babies born from July 1, 2010 to July 2011
dropped 200,000. The U.S. fertility
which was 2.1 kids per woman has now dropped to 1.9 kids. Demographers expect the population to grow
more once the economy is fixed.
Opinion-
This article about the
population was very interesting. I never
really followed things about the population of the United States which it said
was 311 million. I think that this is a
good thing that our population growth is slowing. All over the world many more people are being
born than die. This is causing our
population to increase rapidly. We should
all try and limit how many kids people can have to help prevent overpopulation
because if people don’t try and limit it we will run out of resources and people
will start starving and dying.
Questions-
1.
How much of a population can the United States
support with its ever increasing number of citizens?
2.
What would the world do if the population of
Earth outgrew its carrying capacity in terms of food supply and resources?
3.
Why don’t more countries around the world limit
families to having between 1-2 kids to help stop overpopulation?
4.
If overpopulation continues the pace it is going
will the world consider trying to populate other planets?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOpinion/Reflection:
ReplyDeleteFrom hearing how the population is getting out of control in class, it had gotten me worried on how anyone would find a solution. The problem is there is no solution that would fit both human wants and environmental needs. When I read the title and saw the U.S population was decreasing, I was both surprised and happy, happy because maybe this problem will be fixed before reaching its carrying capacity. However, that was a naive thought because simply looking at the population figures for the United States is too narrow a perspective. We live in a global economy. The issue is total global population and consumption figures. There really is no simple solution involving national boundaries. For sure, the United States as it is and as its population is projected is not facing a serious, immediate crisis. But the world may be.
Also, actually limiting global population rates before reaching the crisis carrying capacity limits would take world efforts. However, there is currently no means to enact and enforce any such policy or law. Interested people and scientists may talk about the wisdom of such things, but that is all they can do—talk. There is no single world ruler or government that could bring the policy into being.
As another example of the complex challenges of population control, consider how problematic limiting births to even two children turns out to be. For example, if a single couple can have one child—at age 28, perhaps—and the couple live to be 80, and their child has a kid at 28, then the population is already uneven. For the grandparents then, will only be 56, having a ratio of 2 parents to 3 descendants. This pattern would just go on and on and the difference in the population would just become greater. At the cost of limiting a very important woman’s right—whether to have children and how many—the impact on the population would not be that great. So much would have been given up and very little gained.
This situation simply requires further study. The challenge is to find the policies—and the agencies—to allow as much human comfort and material abundance as possible at a sustainable level.
Questions:
Do you believe it is right to limit amount of children a couple can have? Do you think it would work?
Would a simple decrease in population—nationally or globally—really by itself produce a significant reduction in the use of “resources,” or might not “fewer people” simply consume more per person and thereby maintain or even increase the use of resources?
Is there really any existing agency with sufficient power and authority to create, impose, and enforce limits on birth rates?
Opinion/Reflection
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how quickly our population has been growing. The economy makes sense as being a factor that prevents some births: you can't afford to support a baby, so you don't have one. WIth all our in class discussions about how to solve this problem, many options there are and we can make a million options that make sense. However, actually enforcing and performing the action is what the problem is. Scientists and government officials can easily can come up with a solution: how to use less space, how to consume less, how to keep the population low, how to prevent diseases, etc. The problem is actually enforcing the solution. You can tell people that there is a limit to how many children they can have, but you can't prevent births. Sure, you can kill babies, but now you have the problem of being inhumane and conflicting with religious beliefs. There's not a way for somebody to stop a baby from being born. The government can't be walking around with everybody, saying,"Oh no you're at your child limit you can't have that baby." Once the moment happens, a baby is born and the government can't stop it.
Question
2) The human population can definitely move to other planets and other solar systems if we run out of space and resources on Earth. Every thinks that the sun running out will cause us to die, but overpopulation can definitely come before the sun dies. We've all seen the movies; Star Wars, Star Trek, etc. Humans in the future will be able to transport people to other planets. Im sure before we reach overpopulation, we will be able to find planets that humans can live on. With the technology we'll have in the future, I'm sure transporting large amounts of people off Earth will allow us to reduce our impact on Earth, and reduce overpopulation.
Opinion/Reflect:
ReplyDeleteIn class we learned about the human population growing very rapidly compared to other species and it being a problem without the right solution. Now hearing about one of the biggest countries in the world growing slowly in population is very surprising to me as well as good to hear. To hear that the United States is growing slowly in population felt good to hear but it is just a thought that will not change anything. I think it good that the population is decreasing. What I think really needs to be handled with is the way people use technology and resources to keep living before our carrying capacity is reached. I feel as though our countries population will not rise soon because of the economy but when it does it will add oil to the fire. This meaning carrying capacity issues for the Earth arising. I see the United States as not having problems with population right now but as a whole for Earth I think there is rising to be an issue.
Expansion:
1. What does the slower population increase mean for a citizen in the United States? Explain.
2. What factors will increase or decrease human population in undeveloped countries when they grow so fast? Explain.
3. What can change the future of human population size into decreasing or increasing? Explain.