Overpopulation and Poverty: A Dangerous Future

Overpopulation and Poverty: A Dangerous Future

            In our society, overpopulation is coming to be a serious problem that could leave us in dismay. This problem is undoubtedly directly connected to the growth and birth rate of people in poverty. The word poverty can have various definitions but for me the definition is simple: one who cannot support themselves financially. The idea of overpopulation and its relation to poverty has been debated upon by many including Garrett Hardin in his most famous essay Lifeboat Ethics: The Case against Helping the Poor. In it he uses many examples to illustrate his points such as the world food bank and the tragedy of the commons. Similar to Hardin, I believe that in order to have a positive and healthy future for the generations after myself, the problem of overpopulation needs to be solved.

Before entering college I never really thought of the word poverty and its definition. After being exposed to the various authors in my Foundation in Liberal Arts class and learning more about politics and social class in my International Business class, I feel that I have better defined what poverty means to me. Poverty is active when one cannot support themselves financially and relies mainly on the support of others or the government to sustain food and shelter; this definition is how I see poverty.

            Overpopulation and poverty have many clear relations to each other. One argument that relates the two is that most people in poverty populate faster than wealthy people or people living comfortably. People who are wealthy tend to focus more on their career in their earlier years and becoming successful rather than starting a family young. Unlike the rich, those who are poor tend to focus less on becoming wealthy and more on starting a family. Staring a family earlier raises the population quicker and coming from a family that has a history of young parents might influence the children of such families to do the same which, in turn, creates a long line of people becoming young parents; therefore, speeding up population. Also, poorer people have a lack of sex education and do not have the resources to prevent a pregnancy such as condoms or birth control. For some this may be controversial but in today’s society we must not be ignorant to the fact that people are not as against pre-marital sex and contraceptives as they might have been in the past. That being said, the lack of education is one prominent reason for the high birth rates of the poor.

Another argument I would like to propose is that people in poverty are, in my opinion, ignorant to their effect on the world and other people. Not only do they not have the resources to prevent pregnancy, they do not seem to care about their effect on the world or at least understand the effect they have on it. If they did, they would surely understand the consequences of having a vast amount of children and having children early. These consequences would include: overpopulation, lack of sufficient food, lack of sufficient living space, etc. Ignorance such as this will only lead to furthering the high population rates.

            Some might argue that a system of voluntary restraint and sharing would lower the amount of poor people in our society and in turn bring overpopulation to a standstill; this argument is, in my opinion, invalid. Hardin addresses a very similar situation in his essay which he calls “The Tragedy of the Commons”. In this he reasons that “Under a system of private property, the men who own property recognize their responsibility to care for it, for if they don’t they will eventually suffer” (pg. 360). This meaning that one who owns property, such as a farmer and a farm, must do the work to keep it up or their shelter, business, or source of income will plummet. He also writes that “Asking everyone to use it with discretion [the commons] will hardly do, for the considerate [man] who refrains from overloading the commons suffers more than the selfish one who says his needs are greater.” (pg. 360). By this he is basically stating the people take more than their needs; therefore, a system of voluntary restraint would not work. If everyone had the restraint it took for a system like this to work, poverty and overpopulation would be closer to becoming extinct. Sadly, this can not work because there will always be the one person who puts their own needs over the many and place this system in ruin. Two natural resources that directly relate to Hardin’s idea of the “Commons” are air and water. People treat these necessary resources as commons, therefore they have become polluted. Future quickened growth of population and people in poverty will only make this problem worse.

                        With the facts presented, it is difficult to envision a positive and prosperous future if overpopulation continues to increase as rapidly as it has been in current years. If those who live in poverty continue to give birth to an abundance of children the natural resources that are necessary to live will become extinct along with a thriving and successful future. In conclusion, overpopulation and its relation to poverty is real and if it goes unchecked, the future does not look promising.