neo-Malthusians vs anti-Malthusians

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

The saddest thing about most of the theory of economics and demography is that all is done by 1st world scholars with only peripheral view of the developing world. The problem is they only see their nation in the growth phase. They have no experience of what happens when nations exhaust its possibility of growth and base their theories solely on speculation. Both neo-Malthusian and anti-Malthusians are speculative BS. What happens when resources go dry is not famine. Its rather stagnation - when both population and innovation and economy ceases to grow and rather comes to an equilibrium.

[@davepaul8975]

Excellent

[@emilholst9789]

I've always tought this aswell. The problem comes when our economic system assumed continues growth and would collapse with stagnation. So where does that leave us?

[@0zoneTherapyCures]

Thomas Malthus's great grandfather, Daniel, was accused of poisoning and killing Queen Anne as her physician.

[@donaldquirk7801]

I wouldn't doubt it. These people are nuts I seen it firsthand. When I was in respiratory therapy school if someone was on Medicare/Medicaid they would get substandard care and even be intentionally neglected which led to death. I got into a huge fight with my professor over incorrect albuteral treatments and the RTs charting suctions without actually doing them. I left and just started doing odd jobs because I didn't want to be a part of murder.

[@johnsanchez7828]

As we are presently discovering, the Malthusian world view is a very limited historical premise. Food is only one of several resource variables being impacted by today's increasing populations: there are environmental costs as well as the growing economic challenges of funding an acceptable standard of living for a poorly skilled workforce which is being systematically replaced by AI and technology. The inevitable convergence of insufficient water, food, clean energy, meaningful employment, global resource sustainability, etc will only lead to problems Malthus couldn't have conceived of in his wildest nightmares.

[@veziop]

perfect for my essay, thanks!!!

[@adamda4133]

I love your teaching oh my god my life is clearer now!

[@marieladuncan4521]

Very useful for my students and easy to follow. Thanks

[@CarCare-India]

I am Preparing and appearing for Indian Civil Services. And i will say you video is very very simple to follow and effective to the point. Keep up Sir.

[@pleaseenteraname3607]

This channel started to early, been 6 years since your last video… you should’ve kept posting, you’d have a large subscriber base by now

[@sajidkhan4319]

the information I really required is all present in your lecture sir. thank you

[@aisforapple2494]

The 1973 classic film, 'Soylent Green', which expresses the Malthusian Theory, claimed that the NYC of 2022 would have a population of 40,000,000, when in actuality it was 8.3 million. I lived through the 1970s and 'The Population Bomb' was a total dud. None of Ehrlich's postulations were even close.

[@edenicawakening]

Malthus was wrong.

[@thesleeplesstm]

Helpful!!! Just language could be used in an easier way, for those struggling in English THANK YOU!

[@gisellesoso384]

lol

[@craven891]

Informative and concise

[@tommyodonovan3883]

Also see Jon P Holdren....Obama's 2008 Top Science Adviser and an admitted NM.

[@joanmargaret4899]

Actually, when population was LOWER in India there were MORE people in poverty. That's a fact.

[@MegamikazeMoriko]

no technology + bigger population = SEVERE food shortage (anti-technology anti-malthusian) no technology + smaller population = food shortage (anti-technology pro-malthusian) big technology + bigger population = food shortage (pro-technology anti-malthusianism) big technology + smaller population = food surplus (pro-technology pro-malthusianism) so SEVERE food shortage food shortage food surplus which one do you choose?

[@derekb.e1151]

So, when groceries put twice the amount of foods on the shelf that they forecast to sell and that every week, this is shortage. I think you got it wrong bro!

[@abbacab77]

cake, please

[@صلعةوأفتخر]

يا أخي دخلت على قناتك و شفت لك فيديوهات إسلامية الله يكتب أجرك بخصوص هذا الموضوع مادامك مسلم الحمدلله فأعلم أن الرزق من الله وحده و هذه الخزعبلات أتركها لمالثوس و أصدقائه والسلام عليكم

[@granudisimo]

We already live in a post scarcity economy, problem being that wealth is increasingly concentrating in smaller and smaller hands, and it's funny that those who benefit from that concentration, are the same that push malthusianism and artificial scarcity/programmed obsolescence, all of it fueled by outrageous surplus labor theft and political manipulation through lobbying.

[@overusedcringe4742]

I think research shows that the 9 billionth person will never be born, meaning we will never reach 9 billion at once, and at our current food production rate, we still have plenty of food left over to support 8 billion, so I'm gonna have to disagree

[@neikedfarmer5559]

Kind of unclear what is the main difference between malthusians and neo mathusians

[@blackhand8299]

from my understanding, Neo Malthusians think earth's resource are finite and people are basically expense. While anti malthusians believe as population increases, they bring with them talents, potential, and ideas. And that with technological innovation driven by demand, we can overcome obatacles such as limited resources.

[@blackhand8299]

I personally believe the neo malthusian viewpoint is kinda outdated and just fearmongering. A lot of its proponents suggested our population will see a steady decline on the 70s and 80s because earth couldnt support our population. As you can see peeps being born is still increasing and weve found more ways to feed ourselves. Its not healthy but we still found a way.

[@oliviachipperfield6029]

​@BLACK HAND anti Malthusians are magical thinkers. We can't keep outrunning the inevitable (as population keeps rising ).

[@overusedcringe4742]

​@@oliviachipperfield6029 I think research shows that the 9 billionth person will never be born, meaning we will never reach 9 billion at once, and at our current food production rate, we still have plenty of food left over to support 8 billion, so I'm gonna have to disagree

[@Panamenya]

Food production is not the only variable that needs to be accounted for when analyzing human overpopulation. Indeed, there are many, many others, such as: --the increased production of waste worldwide, particularly plastic waste (that has no viable solution in sight) by a growing human population; --dwindling habitat for non-human organisms, particularly large mammals and carnivores that depend on complex food webs of their own in the wild and large areas in which to thrive; --air, soil, & water pollution increases resulting from increased human populations; --scarcity of water and increasing droughts throughout the world (as human population increases); --overfishing; --insect population collapse, which affects all other food webs; --etc. So when someone says that "Malthusian and Neo-Malthusianism has been debunked" please keep in mind that these two ONLY analyzed food production and no other real-world variable that is affected by an increasing human population. Food production can keep up with the demand of an exponentially growing population because of fossil fuels, which artificially bulks up food production. And even so, there are hundreds of millions of people around the world who do not get enough to eat right now, due to various factors (which do NOT get better with more people, only worse). Increasing the population is not going to make these (and other) problems better or easier to solve -- only worse and more difficult, involving far more sacrifices from everyone!

[@0zoneTherapyCures]

Big Ag is not the answer, since it is destroying much of the earth's topsoil with overuse of pesticides and not enough, if any, crop rotation. We must return to local farming, harvesting of REAL seeds, not GMO Frankenseeds that need to be bought every year.

[@Ragtime4]

One can not “analyze” something that does not exist. Perhaps the phrase you are looking for is “hypothesize about.”

[@Waldvogel45]

Slops ? a hopless idea ! and you could easily edit the errors out of the audio. Reading somebody write is boring. Try again.

[@lkomaromi6878]

Great summary

[@arpudli8962]

neo

[@mythologicalmyth]

Subjective

[@templar-yu5ve]

Thanos was right

[@nishalfishal]

HAHHAAH

[@twindragon-tu1wd2]

Be

[@jarrodyuki7081]

i worship thanos.