After reading this article I was curious as to how much the world population grows each year. Farrell is wrong with his 50 million per month figure. The world adds 84 million people per year. Every four years the world adds a United States population to the world. That sounds unsustainable considering the amount of oil, food, and water on this planet. What Farrell ignores is the likelihood of a Fourth Turning war. Nothing like a thermonuclear exchange to get world population back in alignment. 

Why big-money men ignore world’s biggest problem

Commentary: We’re not dealing with the overpopulation disaster

By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch

SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (MarketWatch) — Last year Bill Gates said if he had “one wish to improve humanity’s lot over the next 50 years” he would pick an “energy miracle,” some magical “new technology that produced energy at half the price of coal with no carbon-dioxide emissions,” says CNN editor Fareed Zakaria in the New York Times.

And he said “he’d rather have this wish than a new vaccine or medicine or even choose the next several American presidents.”

Energy miracle? But that’s not where he’s giving his billions. In fact, since 1994 the Gates Foundation has spent over $26 billion on philanthropic projects, ventures and innovations, lots in vaccines and medicines that extend life, increase mortality rates and encourage population growth.

Yes, all good stuff, but ultimately undermining the possibility of discovering a magical energy miracle.

Worse, if that energy miracle is discovered anywhere its value could easily be wiped out by the world’s out-of-control population growth, forecast to reach 10 billion by 2050 from 7 billion today, one brief generation.

So why is Gates not focusing solely in his energy miracle? Better yet, why is he ignoring what he agrees is the world’s biggest problem? Even undermining the solution?

Warren Buffett: Don’t ‘play safe’ with my billions, hit a home run

What happened to Gates and his $26 billion mission? When Warren Buffett added more than $30 billion to Gates’s foundation a few years back, Buffett said: “Don’t just go for safe projects. Take on the really tough problems.”

Well, to put it bluntly folks, the Gates Foundation is not spending the money on the “really tough problems.” It is indeed playing it safe.

So what does Gates see as the world’s other “biggest problem?” Not global warming. Nor poverty. Not peak oil. The absolute biggest? One like the trigger mechanism on a nuclear bomb? One that could throw a monkey wrench into global economic growth, end capitalism, even destroy civilization? The one that if not solved soon renders all efforts to solve all the other global problems — including global warming, poverty and fossil fuel depletion — irrelevant, futile and impossible ever to solve?

Overpopulation. That was the consensus “biggest problem” when a group of billionaires that included Gates got together at a secret meeting in Manhattan a couple of years ago.

Get it? Out-of-control population is the world’s No. 1 problem. Yet, governments with their $65 trillion global GDP aren’t even trying to solve the world’s overpopulation problem. They’re clueless. Can these philanthropists and their billions stop the coming disaster? No. In fact, their billions are accelerating the problem.

So what will shock the world awake? A catastrophe. Only a major disaster, a massive global collapse bigger than anything in world history is needed to alter the inevitable.

2 billion past Peak Population

Scientists estimate that the Earth’s natural resources can reasonably support about 5 billion people. We already have 7 billion. Get it? We’re 2 billion over Earth’s carrying capacity. Plus we’re racing headlong to 10 billion by 2050, adding over 50 million more each month.

Simple math, high school economics and minimal psychological common sense tells us we’re deep in denial and headed into a disaster.

And still, no adults are dealing with overpopulation, the “toughest of all problems.” Instead, they’re dealing with “safe projects” that make them feel good in the moment, short-term solutions that ironically make the long-term problem worse not better.

The truth is that Gates and his billionaire buddies are in denial, trapped in what Mother Jones columnist Julia Whitty calls “The Last Taboo.” She says population is hidden in a “conspiracy of silence” that “unites the Vatican, lefties, conservatives and scientists” and now the world’s richest philanthropists have joined this “conspiracy of silence.”

Scientific American also warned that population is “the most overlooked and essential strategy for achieving long-term balance with the environment.” Why? Politicians ignore this “last taboo,” denying the fact that if all nations consumed resources at the same rate as America, we’d need six Earths just to survive today.

Check the math: First World citizens now consume 32 times more resources such as fossil fuels, and put out 32 times more waste, than do the inhabitants of the Third World. Now they want what we have.

By 2050, with a population of 10 billion, including 1.4 billion each in China and India, we are in effect committing suicide.

How Gates efforts ripple, undermining the future of the planet

“One of the disturbing facts of history is that so many civilizations collapse,” warns Jared Diamond, an environmental biologist and author of “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.” Many “share a sharp curve of decline,” that often begins “only a decade or two after it reaches its peak population, wealth and power.”

Some warn: “It’s already too late.” “We’re past the point of no return.”

Gates billionaire buddies should reexamine the effect of the world’s out-of-control population problem as it ripples through the lens of Diamond’s “collapse equation.” It’s very simple: “More people require more food, space, water, energy, and other resources … There is a long built-in momentum to human population growth.”

So take a moment and ask yourself how the world’s explosive population growth from seven to 10 billion in one short generation, plus their increasing demand for more resources per capita, will ripple through Diamond’s other 10 key variables:

1. Energy

Oil, natural gas, coal: They’re all near or past their tipping points. With costs accelerating, new technologies and alternatives, biofuels, solar, nuclear power, will never be enough. Unfortunately, by 2050 demand for fossil fuels will still be 80% for 10 billion.

2. Food

Two billion global poor live on $2 a day, depend on fish and wild foods that are dying off for protein. Increasing food prices make matters worse. Green revolution failing: United Nations study says new production technologies have not improved food access.

3. Water

Water problems destroyed many earlier civilizations: Today a million lack safe drinking water. By 2015 two-thirds of the world will live in water-stressed countries.

4. Farmland

Water, wind eroding crop soils many times faster than new formation.

5. Forests

We’re losing rain forests and protective timber reserves at accelerating rates.

6. Chemicals

Our air, soil, oceans, lakes and rivers are dying from toxic chemicals.

7. Solar energy

Sunlight’s limited. By 2050 we’ll use 100% photosynthetic capacity.

8. Ozone layer

Our CO2 is destroying our ozone protection, reducing solar energy.

9. Diversity

Wild species, populations, genetic diversity, lost, rest out of balance.

10. Alien species

Transferring species to new lands destroying native species.

Diamond’s historical research tells us that leaders are myopic, motivated more by self-interest, expediency and money than by courage, convictions and long-term thinking. They fail to act in time. Unprepared, their worlds crumble fast. They may respond to a catastrophe. But in the end, history tells us over and over that most leaders live in denial, avoiding timely decisions, failing even in time of crises, till it’s too little, too late.

Gates’s Billionaire Philanthropist Club probably knows in their hearts the truth. They’re not in denial. They’ve given up. The problem will never be solved. So they’re not even trying to fix the overpopulation problem, instead, focusing on short-term feel-good efforts, knowing that in the not-too-distant future the planet, our civilization and the human species will fade to black.

Let’s pray that Uncle Warren gets back into the game demanding they “don’t just go for safe projects. Take on the really tough problems.”

32 thoughts on “POPULATION PROBLEM?”

  1. If you care to don your tinfoil hat for a minute, the article below claims that the Gates Foundation is doing VERY much to deal with the population issue:


    I have no idea if the claims are valid. Read and research if you are interested.

    Regardless of the truth of the claims in that article, I can guarantee you that the likes of Gates and Buffett are considering overpopulation issues. How they might want to do deal with them I do not know.

  2. While I am entertain Farrell’s basic premise, his “facts” seem dubious. E.g. “8. Ozone layer

    Our CO2 is destroying our ozone protection, reducing solar energy.”

    Does this even make sense? Sorry, I call bullshit. And if you support your premise w/ bullshit, there is no credibility. Or am I attacking the messenger?

  3. I don’t feel much doom about overpopulation. I mean, I’m pretty sure if you combine the Millennials and Gen Xers you still fall short on the amount of Baby Boomers. So here in the US we are on our way to a population decrease. Also, China has a one child policy. All of the fear mongering with population is based on assuming exponential population growth forever, which isn’t possible. It has already self corrected and will be evident when Baby Boomers around the world die off.

  4. @Petey –

    Millennials number around 60 million, more than three times the size of Gen X – they’re the biggest thing to America since the 72 million baby boomers. If you combine Gen X and Millennials you have far, far more than the Boomer numbers.

  5. RE spoke through me. It should have been 99.8%, but I saved one percent of the global population with capitalism.

  6. Bill and Melinda Gates are doing their part….Gates declared this the “Decade of the Vaccine”….how does this fit in with overpopulation? You figure it out! While you’re figuring it out, don’t forget to have your daughter and son line up for a Gardasil injection (without your knowledge or consent…after all you don’t know what’s best for your children..the government does)

  7. We must follow the Georgia Guidestone’s message:


    the first rule is a bit disturbing considering there are rougly a little over 6 billion people on the planet right now.


  8. Persnickety, I’ve read the info about Gates the “free” vaccines and the hidden sterilization a while back. If I remember correctly his organization was (very quietly, at least in America) sued by multiple countries on behalf of their destroyed young women.

    As for “our” population being stable, just why do you think illegals are allowed to flood in and legals are allowed to come over and underbid our grads? Simple, none of the government Ponzis work without exponentially larger population growth.

    This subject reminds me of Idiocracy, and the truths the movie portrayed.

    It is NOT the 140 IQs that have brains, work ethics and common sense having big families. It is the FriedChickenIstas and people like my non-working sis.

    The population of those that will never amount to much is increasing dramatically. Those of us that pay are on the endangered species list.

    Over the years high level members of government have been heard to whisper about ‘forcing reductions in the standard of living’ or ‘forcing reductions in pay’ or ‘forced conservation.’

    Between fluoride in our water, chemicals and toxins in our “food,” government sponsored/sanctioned obesity and vaccinations/pharmaceuticals, I firmly believe our government not only recognizes the population problem, but is actively trying to fix it by killing us off under the guise of health and safety. Well, not always undercover, they are using the drones to assist in the plans too.

    Welcome to the 21st Century where we will spend trillions extending life and “maintaining the sanctity” of life while spending trillions trying to covertly kill us.

    Craziness continues until it can’t.

  9. TE said “It is NOT the 140 IQs that have brains, work ethics and common sense having big families. It is the FriedChickenIstas and people like my non-working sis.

    The population of those that will never amount to much is increasing dramatically. Those of us that pay are on the endangered species list.”

    Exactly. And when each one turns 18, they get an equal vote. Precisely my point on AWD’s Direct Democracy post-the easier it is to vote, and the higher the percentage of short-sighted or self-indulgent voters, the worse things get. At least make people go to the polling place. If they don’t care enough to go, then maybe they aren’t fit to make decisions on governing.

  10. I figured HIV AIDS was developed to reduce the population.Dont worry some disaster well happen.
    Mabe some eletist phsycopath well come into power and work to destroy the country to the point that people well starve or kill each other off.

  11. Jim says: “Nothing like a thermonuclear exchange to get world population back in alignment.’

    Not to mention all the land that will be useless for 100’s of years. Great idea. An chance we can drop the first one near Philadelphia?

  12. I expect within a few decades the population of America will be back below 200 million or so, due to a combination of falling birthrates, emigration, mass dieoffs and civil wars. I agree that our current population is unsustainably large. The past century in America has been kind of like the 1300s in Europe, and I have a feeling the near future will in America be something like Europe’s 1400s, including sharp contractions in the populations of the lower classes, though this time due to, for one, the end of the existing oil-industrial paradigm, as opposed to say, declining soil yields.
    I may be onto something here. 1300s Europe: booming population, relative peace and stability, agreeable climate, filling in last frontier areas, rising income inequality, peasants growing much faster than middle class,
    followed by climate change, environmental disaster, a pandemic, sociopolitical upheavel, etc.

  13. Humans are like cockroaches.

    Once our population in big enough, the harvesting will commence.

    The pyramids in Giza have population sensors buried deep within them, they are keeping track.

    The organisms that planted and fertilized our planet with humans aren’t going to waste a trip until it’s worth their while. Then, the harvesting combines come down and voila, population problem solved. People made into tasty snacks for the consumers back on the home planet.


  14. Shadows – the US overall has no population issue. We are still a fairly low density country, especially relative to the enormous water resources and arable land we have. It’s the world overall, and some countries in particular – well, all of the middle east, India, China, Bangladesh, Pakistan, parts of Africa, etc. Oddly that seems similar to the list of who has frequent conflicts. Must be just a coincidence.

    What the world can’t manage is multiple billions of people trying to live like Americans. There just isn’t enough oil, coal and pasture land to do it. It probably could manage 1-2B people living like the Dutch, which is still a very nice way to live, but that doesn’t seem to be an economic development model in many places.

  15. Persnickety is correct. The U.S. does NOT have a population problem. It’s the countries and areas he listed that have the problem. This country can easily support a population of 600 million, almost double what we currently have, and perhaps even more than that.

    We’ve been through this overpopulation scare before. In 1968, Stanford professor Paul Ehrlich, who specializes in the study of butterflies, wrote a book entitled “The Population Bomb.” It was a huge hit in academia, which fawned all over its warnings. Here’s how the book begins. “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.”

    Farrell’s article does get off on the right foot when it cites energy as the number one problem the planet faces, including the U.S. As a nation which needs to ADD 350,000 megawatts to the grid by 2030, we don’t have much time left to solve this. And the ONLY practical solution on the horizon is nuclear energy and mining our own available resources.

  16. Too many rats in the box. When they get crowded up they get testy and aggressive and self-destruction reigns. They will chew off their own legs and behavior gets very erratic and aggressive.

    That’s what happening in a lot of areas of the world today. One look at the streets of Calcutta and you have to wonder why they aren’t all slitting each others’ throats.


  17. Persnickety: Of course we have a population problem here. We make up 5% of the world population and use 30% of it’s resources. With the advent of instant communication’awareness worlwide, the other 95% are finding out how well we’ve lived and now they want it too. Problem is, there is not enough for them without us giving up most of ours, and THAT is where the problem lies.

  18. SSS,

    The lady with the reputed highest IQ in this country (200+), Marilyn Vos Savant, said in a column a few years ago that every person in the entire world could stand side by side in the state of Florida without touching.

  19. Genetically engineered bio weapons are a more enviromentallly friendly option.

    Smallpox or one of the “avian” flu influenza types would be my personal weapon of choice.

    You could even deliver them in aerosol form via drones.

    Start with Pakistan and go from there…

  20. Dave – I can’t tell if you don’t get it, are just trying to be cute, or use different meanings of common words than the rest of us. The US land mass could support our population indefinitely (barring climate change, etc.). I don’t have hard numbers but I’ll bet we could even support it using late 19th century technology, as long as we went back to late 19th century labor allocation (you like farming, boy?) and didn’t export any food.

    What we can’t support is when everyone is driving 14mpg SUVs, commuting from 5000sf houses 50 miles from work and eating 6000 calories a day, but that’s a lifestyle issue, not a population issue. Many other parts of the world can’t survive AT ALL without huge amounts of imported food, and can barely avoid famine even with imported food. Same list I wrote above, although China and India can almost feed everyone enough to barely survive with domestic crops if the weather is perfect and no crop failures happen. Many other populous areas are SOL. Attempting to live like the US has from 1955-2005 just makes it much worse.

  21. Dave

    I’m beginning to see why Admin has been on your case. Admittedly, I’m one of the slow learners on this site, but after several severe blows from a 2X4, even a ex-CIA officer gets it.

    You said, “Of course we have a population problem here. We make up 5% of the world population and use 30% of it’s resources.” Question, Dave. Why is our SUCCESS a fucking problem?

    If the rest of the the world is so fucking underdevoped and stupid, then all of a sudden that becomes our problem? Why is that statistic important other than to show there are some really dumbass, corrupt countries on the planet?

    What would make you happy, Dave? Every single human being on Earth gets an EXACT proportion of wealth, energy, and food produced? Is that the answer?

    I just joined the DAVE IS A DUMBFUCK club.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.