Well, since Canada's National Post won't let me post this in their comments about single-child, one-world regulation because it's too long, I'll post it here instead:
This isn't even an old argument, but an ancient one. It wasn't all that many decades ago that 6 billion people were considered 'unsustainable' for Earth by the so-called experts. But then, you know, along come the Norman Borlaugs and his like. It's ironic to think that you also cut in half the likelihood of such genius, too, when you cut the population in half.
It takes only a single flight over the western half of the North American continent to realize the world is nowhere near over-populated. And I'm not talking about supplanting food-producing regions with people, either. I'm thinking of all the absolutely empty, unused space. Is the National Post suggesting that we can dream of colonizing the moon or Mars, but not the Rocky Mountains?
At least until we take the profit motive away from entrepreneurs -- which DOES seem to be the latest trend, however stupid it is! -- I'm pretty confident that we'll figure out how to feed/water/house/employ the growing millions, even at current population growth, for a fair spell yet.
