Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Population Hits 300 Million
ChrisK87 writes "The United States' population will hit 300 million on Tuesday morning, just 39 years after it reached 200 million, the US Census Bureau estimates. A 'population clock' will record the milestone at 0746 (1146 GMT) — a timing based on calculations that factor birth and death rates and migration." From the article: "But it is not possible to say if the 300-millionth American was a new-born or crossed one of the US borders. Correspondents say that there is not expected to be the same hullabaloo as when the figure of 100 million was reached in 1915, or the double century in 1967 when President Johnson gave a speech and newborn Robert Ken Woo Jr was hailed the 200-millionth American by Life magazine. Today, the population figure is mired in the divisive politics of immigration — a hot-button issue ahead of the 7 November mid-term elections, they say." The story has lots of interesting stats and graphs, for those of us so inclined.
America is the only developed nation which is still robustly growing. Our own average fertility rate is just above 2 kids per woman, which is enough to sustain population. The substantial immigration provides grows.
Economist thinks, religion has something to do with the fenomenon...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
You are down to that topsoil level maybe if you are in a desert on the opposite side of the world from the closest volcano (extinct or active.)
Here, however, the nutritious topsoil is about 19' deep on average - some years annually growing with river deposits. Also, in California there are an estimated 1500+ very-long extinct volcanic vents which are loaded with nutritious soil thousands of feet deep. The only places in the world that have only "9 inches" of topsoil are deserts. Just because you only dig down nine inches in your San Francisco condominium and find the concrete structure below does not mean that there is only 9" of topsoil in the whole world.
Oh, and the places in the ocean where there is no life have always had no life. Talk to any REAL marine biologist (not some liberally-biased person) and they will tell you that the oceanic population is not even 1% lower than it was hundreds of years ago (so far as they can tell)...
While we may be overpopulated in the metropolitan areas, but I am absolutely positive that you cannot say you do not contribute to that overpopulation. Go to any truly rural area - like Montana or Alaska - and you will see that overpopulation of the planet is probably not within the grasp of our children's, children's, grandchildren's wildest imaginations.
However, many of the richer nations (especially us Americans) are generally extremely wasteful. The true problem that you should be concerned with is NOT lack of oil, lack of food or lack of space; but generation of waste. So many of the third-world nations are even more wasteful than we Americans (have you ever seen Mexico outside of the tourist-y areas???) There needs to be a more efficient and intelligent means of waste disposal addressed. Granted there is Recycling to help, and compaction techniques are very advanced, that doesn't account for the fact that only 6% of recyclable material is actually recycled, and (estimated) around 45% of garbage is compost able.
Erutangis ym si siht.
> What did they have, 350 million?
More like 290 million, at the peak of the Soviet Union.
> Didn't think the Baltics and Kazakhstan had that many people.
Kazakhstan has about 15 million people.
The three baltic republics together have about 7 million.
For reference, Ukraine has about 50 million. That's the second biggest (after Russia) population of the ex-Soviet republics.
As I recall, Kazakhstan was third. Then Belarus with close to 10 million. Then the others.
I read in Smithsonian magazine last night that the US allows more legal immigrants than the rest of the countries in the world combined. Kind of blew me away.
Read any good sonnets lately?
Carbon dioxide is hardly the only pollutant released by the burning of hydrocarbons. There's tons of waste products, including nitrogen and sulfer oxides that cause acid rain, and naturally occuring radioactive materials like uranium. While CO2 pollution my be reversible, the health and environmental damage caused by these other waste products certainly are not. Moreover, the waste products of nuclear plants are containable, while the waste products of coal plants are freely released into the biosphere. Because of this fact, coal plants actually release more radioactive material into their local environment than properly-maintained nuclear power stations. You receive more radiation living next to a coal plant, because its spewing uranium and thorium into the atmosphere, than you do living next to a nuclear plant, where the radiation is contained behind layers of shielding and safety protocols.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...