Post(s) tagged with "world population"

waqasmalik:

“here’s where the people live & here’s where the money lives”
population vs. money distribution 
further proof of imperialistic inequality 

waqasmalik:

“here’s where the people live & here’s where the money lives”

population vs. money distribution 

further proof of imperialistic inequality 

sociolab:

itsjustthatway:

turnthrice:

Hmm, I couldn’t find a credible source that explicitly agrees with this but I have found that the USA does indeed make up 5% of the world’s population.
Oh, and that it produces about 50% of the world’s solid waste.  

This statistic was taken from the documentary, Blind Spot. 

I <3 citations.

sociolab:

itsjustthatway:

turnthrice:

Hmm, I couldn’t find a credible source that explicitly agrees with this but I have found that the USA does indeed make up 5% of the world’s population.

Oh, and that it produces about 50% of the world’s solid waste.  

This statistic was taken from the documentary, Blind Spot.

I <3 citations.

Source: itsjustthatway

Source: the-sideproject

littlepresident:

(via World Population: Where it’s thick and where it’s thin - The Big Picture - Boston.com)

littlepresident:

(via World Population: Where it’s thick and where it’s thin - The Big Picture - Boston.com)

Two words: 7 billion. That’s the number of humans our little world supports as of about 10:48 a.m. Pacific Standard Time today. You may remember 6 billion. We hit that in 1999. You may feel like you’re special, like your children are special, but we are each just one of billions of human animals on planet Earth. For example, when I was born in 1971, I became person number 3,793,257,443, according to the BBC’s package on this milestone. That right: in my 40 years on this planet, the world’s population has nearly doubled.

There are simply too many of us. Quality of life is suffering. Quality of life for other life forms and the natural resources upon which we depend for healthy life are suffering.

- Why I’m Not Having Kids — And You Shouldn’t Either - Forbes (via wespeakfortheearth)

Source: forbes.com

Women 'Having a Seat at the Table' is Not Enough ⇢

canisfamiliaris:

Women are 51% of the World’s Population. But….

I don’t want equal rights in this wrong system, I don’t want an equal number of capitaliastic boars and sows. I want everyone can realize himself without gender discrimination nor economic discrimination.

Source: azspot

the-green-chemist:

7 Billion - National Geographic Magazine

theatlantic:

How to Feed 9 Billion People by 2050:

Really, the question isn’t how will we feed 9 billion by 2050? The question is how many people will we really have and what will they be eating? 
Poverty of course plays a big role in both these issues because, as Juergen Voegele, director, agriculture and rural development, the World Bank, pointed out to Revkin: “We already have close to one billion people who go hungry today, not because there is not enough food in the world but because they cannot afford to buy it.” 
Raising incomes, or course, is a difficult nut — one that doesn’t succumb to a solution hatched in a lab. But more income means better-educated families, and even declining population growth. The flip side, though, is that rising incomes are also associated with higher meat consumption, which can get us closer to option five on Smil’s lifestyle if we are not careful. So the best case: to raise incomes and to incentivize less resource-intensive food consumption. 
But we don’t need to become vegans to save the world (which would doom us even if we did because so few would go along). In many developing countries, such an approach would amount to culinary imperialism, given the importance of meat for both income generation, the result of having a cow or goat or two, and as a source of much-needed calories for children from milk and scant meat. Never mind the use of manure to grow crops. We’re not talking about factory farms here, but animals that play a central role in cultures and livelihoods.

Read the rest of the story at The Atlantic.

theatlantic:

How to Feed 9 Billion People by 2050:

Really, the question isn’t how will we feed 9 billion by 2050? The question is how many people will we really have and what will they be eating? 

Poverty of course plays a big role in both these issues because, as Juergen Voegele, director, agriculture and rural development, the World Bank, pointed out to Revkin: “We already have close to one billion people who go hungry today, not because there is not enough food in the world but because they cannot afford to buy it.” 

Raising incomes, or course, is a difficult nut — one that doesn’t succumb to a solution hatched in a lab. But more income means better-educated families, and even declining population growth. The flip side, though, is that rising incomes are also associated with higher meat consumption, which can get us closer to option five on Smil’s lifestyle if we are not careful. So the best case: to raise incomes and to incentivize less resource-intensive food consumption. 

But we don’t need to become vegans to save the world (which would doom us even if we did because so few would go along). In many developing countries, such an approach would amount to culinary imperialism, given the importance of meat for both income generation, the result of having a cow or goat or two, and as a source of much-needed calories for children from milk and scant meat. Never mind the use of manure to grow crops. We’re not talking about factory farms here, but animals that play a central role in cultures and livelihoods.

Read the rest of the story at The Atlantic.

Loading more posts

I cannot give a definition about myself. I'm a changing phenomenon like you.


Ask me anything Submit

Ask

Members

Following