Interesting topic particularly in time of pandemic.

@blackdefense552

4 жыл бұрын

Interesting indeed

@pooranikannan7634

4 жыл бұрын

True

Realy clear explanation. Thank you.

God, I love Khan! He's a teacher I listen to everyday! I learn something new and expand on other subjects eeryday and the best part is I can never be late to class! Keep going Khan, revolutionize education! Show the world that learning can be fun and interesting on any degree.

this helped me a lot thanks

@ajn158 The other 4 are city-states that don't produce their own food. Bangladesh actually produces most of its own food.

Thanks for this, and all of your great educational materials, Sal. The thing that you didn't mention here in this brief introduction, is that the Malthusian Limit has been artificially increased since the late 1800s by crude oil (and "natural gas" = methane) production, which allowed the food supply to increase. Richard Manning says that for most of the people in the world (perhaps 7B of 8B ppl), there are about 10 calories of petroleum in every 1 calorie of our food. Now add to this the "Peak Oil" work of M. King Hubbert-- BTW, Global Crude Oil Production peaked 11/2018-- and you will see we have a serious problem on our hands, as oil supplies dwindle, and the Malthusian Limit returns down to pre-Petrolpocene ("Age of Oil") levels, likely about 1B people.

Thanks man!

Thanks for outlining the basics of Malthusianism. I appreciate that you left open the question of whether Malthus will be correct in predicting how todays 8 billion population and growing will fare.

I'm was here during Covid-19 2020!

Who’s here because their human geo teacher made them watch thus

5:45 of clip: Modern industrialized societies always require more resources per person to keep the society functional when compared to non-industrialized society. This means population and production increases in developed society limits the population because it's much harder for the individual in developed societies to acquire the resources to keep the production expansion going than it is for the average individual in non-industrialized societies where resources are scarce and life is cheap.

I think the underlying logic of Mathus' argument is actually sound. The amount of resources on earth is finite. But *provided* people continue to reproduce indefinitely, the population will grow exponentially, until it is forced to stop growing by the limit. There does exist such a limit for Earth. It's just higher than Malthus had anticipated. The second problem with this is that people did not continue to reproduce indefinitely. Because of the industrial revolution, people urbanized rapidly and people in urban areas have incentives to produce fewer children, since in cities, children are liabilities, not assets, unlike in farms. Hence the population growth rate decreased, instead of constantly increasing, as Malthus had anticipated.

@phanindraputhineedi7807

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely correct 👍

@Penguinedeantarc

2 жыл бұрын

Similar thing happens in the mouse utopia experiment, the problem is their population is declined rapidly once it goes into declining even with great amount of resource available.

@feynstein1004

2 жыл бұрын

@@Penguinedeantarc Oh okay I didn't know that

@Sideshow-Bob

2 жыл бұрын

the limit is not set by the amount of resources in this planet tho, its set by technology, and our tech has been growing at a higher rate than our population, his argument wasnt sound, he underestimated technology, even if population didnt stop growing still wrong

@colkilgore9973

Жыл бұрын

Doesn’t matter, Gates and Schwab still want to depopulate this world.

thank you soo much ...

very interesting!!

Thomas Malthus underestimated the power of condoms!

@TheManofthecross

4 жыл бұрын

he also underestimated the power of farming keeping up with population and the tech progress to make farming much more efficient with what is already there for better farm yealds.

@philipdonkor446

4 жыл бұрын

hahahahaha

@sam_k8868

4 жыл бұрын

Well population is still rising and people are getting poorer and poorer than their fathers generations.

@sonnyh9774

3 жыл бұрын

He also underestimated the power of Bill Gates funded vaccines.

Industrial agriculture is not a sustainable model. Petroleum based fuels and fertilizers will continue to increase in price as they decrease in availability. It might not come to an end this decade, but when it does, the permaculture homesteader will survive and prosper.

This explains alot about murica part 2

This is exactly what happens in many animal populations and from there the idea probably originated. Would be interesting to look at the population charts of some African countries e.g. Somalia and Ethiopia with recurring famines.

I think this is a great video, congratz, I just want to note that the two showed graphs aren't expressed in the same terms, that is, they don't measure the same thing ... the result may be the same but the fact is that they are misleading

Thanks

More History Please!

@blueelien1876

3 жыл бұрын

im from future

at 7:22 I was just waiting to hear Bangladesh as someone half Bangladeshi.

Sitting here watching this video while having just seen COVID and a with a war growing larger in Eastern Europe

The interesting thing about the start of this video is we are actually getting to the point where food, water and energy will be cause of famine and many wars.

if you are searching for this quote on the original essay , it is found chapter 7 page 44.

i read the book Freakonomics !

word i agree with all of you but think about the extra workers you would have that's more beggars or farm hands or something that could be used to make more money???? that's what i would want to know???? :)

Okay, so this video shows that Japan and Germany is definitely not growing in population size like Malthus thought, but what about India and China? Those two countries have pretty much many of the problems Malthus hypothesized, or at least in the countryside, which is where Malthus thinks is where most of the population growth occurs.

is there a second part of this??

I found this summary much better than crash course histories mess of an attempt. I know this was made in 2011 but right now Monaco is the most dense at around 26k ppl per sq km so I doubt Bangladesh was the most dense 7 years ago compared to Monaco and some of the island nations in Caribbean.

Does anyone else thinks there is a remarkable resemblance between Thomas Malthus and Bill Gates

@ArtisanTony That's exactly what I was thinking.

it is now holland which is most dense

But couldn't one argue that as the Malthusian limit rises, the amount of wild land on the planet diminishes, meaning there could be a cap on expansion? Hopefully by then, we'll have started farming in space and have not lost all our wild lands.

WOW BRO THAT INTELLIGENT VIDEO FROM YOU

@PEFOBE007 Ups, sorry not Montana, Montana is too big. I meant to say New York. So image 150 million people in that state.

It changed because we observed it.

and here we are

you forgot that europe at one time had overpopulated to its own detriment [ plaque ] - it taught them a better way . Better infrastructure is the most important part .

sounds like the apocalypse in the Super Natural series

playlist name?

that voice is familiar...any chance the guy lecturing is a fellow who lectures IR in japan??

The solution is to balance what you will produce(no. of child) to what you can give (sustain money).

Yet he refuted those analyses in his later writings; not that the establishment will ever let you hear *that* detail.

you aught to start a physical school and base your system on your website! how huge would that be?!?!?

Global food production has peaked due to soil erosion, urbanization, and salination of irrigated farmland. High yields of modern agriculture are dependent on petroleum, which has also peaked. The high yielding seed varieties respond strongly to petroleum-based chemical fertilizer. Corn yields would fall from 130 to 30 bushels per acre in the absence of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and petroleum powered irrigation. If we do not reduce human population, mass starvation cannot be prevented.

to everyone that has commented on this video.... Yall have just helped me with my assignment *kisses* *kisses* *hugs*

@5manafireball

7 жыл бұрын

Linda M x kisses snuzzles Xdddd

@alysawheeler4907

6 жыл бұрын

I think it's crazy that we now get info for assignments from youtube and not like a library or a book .....

@byteyotta certainly not all aspects of it.

@PEFOBE007 Yes, but Monaco is irrelevant in that case. Monaco has 35 000 people, while Bangladesh is around 150 million and the country's territory is pretty much the same as that of the state of Montana. Imagine 150 million people living in Montana.

Is it true, he based this theory on the observation of bacteria in a petri dish?

I must have missed it. At what point do we factor in fossil fuel's use to aid humanity's locus-like spread across the planet. Is no habitat left untouched? Neo-Malthusians have a point.

Oglan olmuyub ki Thomas Malthus

Malthusian disaster and "soylent green"?

@ajn158 My island country's in at Number 3!!!

Food and renewable resources are populations too.

@ajn158 Technically- but the top 4 are all high-end metropolitan islands- completely different demographically from Bangledesh... so many can fit in the former b/c they are living in high-rises and skyscrapers... not packed slums. The resource problems facing Bangledesh due to its density wouldn't even on anyone living in Monaco's radar. Between global warming/rising seas, it's low elevation and an extremely dense population- this is not going to be a good century for Bangladesh.

population growth is exponential/geometric, not linear.

@gaby6406

3 жыл бұрын

it's actually varies

@giordanobruno9106

3 жыл бұрын

@@gaby6406 In the global context over the last several centuries -- which is the context for this discussion -- it has been exponential/geometric, not linear.

We have NOT been able to outstrip population. Most of the cause for our current metacrisis is that our efforts to outstrip population are collapsing our biosohere.

today, do we have more NUTRITIOUS calories or EMPTY calories...more vegetables or donuts?

Other problems with Malthus; Gene pools as population definitions.. thresholds produce extinctions, Also, war often leads to population growth. ie, Rwanda's birth rate grew after conflict. Rape is a factor, but also people breed while they can & adopt new social strategies, relocation, economies alter. class antagonisms resolve, cooperation, innovation can even discover new resources etc. Malthus model does not generate any such complexity, seems like a bland & rather cynical statement. ho hum.

Monaco has a higher density. Correct me if im wrong.

May have been in interesting to introduce some reasons why a population should grow or not. Like the ability of contraception by condom or pill. And that in poorer countries the child's are needed to take care of the parents at some time, in developed countries is that no longer necessary

There is the food line but then we have the climate line which a lot of scientists would put us above the amount of fossil fuels we should be buring, how is that going to decrease if the population doubles over 40 years or something like that? Most of the world's problems comes down to there being too many people but the argue against this idea using their emotions instead of common sense. It's in the state now where we can't do anything about it but we can certainly be aware of population.

Interesting fact; In demonology, Malthus (also Halphas, Malthas, or Malthous) is an Earl of Hell, commanding 26 legions of demons, who is said to have a rough voice when speaking. He is often depicted in the shape of a stork. Malthus builds towers and fills them with ammunition and weapons, an armorer of sorts. He is a prince of Hell. He is also said to send his legions into battle, or to places designated by higher commanding demons.

May be you could dig-deep-into something more about how to achieve the malthusian limit or in other words please explain if this limit could be clutched for a balance control for every country to maintain supply and demand crisis.

malthus was right, but too early.. our world population is at 7.5 billion, moving to 9 then 10 billion, meanwhile the world is strained by just too many people competing for the same scarce resources

Thomas Malthus should have founded the Club of Rome? He thinks just like them, but didn't understand all the potential options humans will have by the time we run out of space to grow our food. In studying this I have several concepts preventing this problem.

Hi

3:50 that aged well

@marsCubed Name the population of France before and after WWI.

The pandemic is proving him right already, waw.

@khanacademy It doesn't matter how dense you are, it matters how free a market you have... Given a free enough market productivity rises (much) more then enough.

It's important to point out that Developed Countries have much slower pop growth, due to the fact that people in general become much more specialized in jobs and have to dedicade much more time and energy into their career, rather then producing a family therefore contributing to pop growth. Also Keep in mind that having a 1 child, is a negative growth, having 2 children is neutral-no growth, and only by having 3 children or more in a family, does the actual population increase. It's not that people don't want to extend population in developed countries (they dont care about demographics), they just dont want to handle so many children. Also, thank you for this video.

@thjeokthjeok443

6 жыл бұрын

blagovest , no developed countries also gave women right to choice - And the more education also helped - Lots of women have no career and still have less children in developed countries - there were lots of women that were having less based on the effects on Nature - the human carbon foot print ! Education is crucial ! Not just about the economy though . We dont want to extend the populations in developed countries , why would we want to destroy what we worked so hard to create ? Your wrong .

@pauseTV Winner.

Even if population stop increasing, societies keep consuming more resources once they are really developed technologically. At some point, every country may have a consumption similar to the US or Uk or France, can the earth accommodate such consumption? Maybe his theory still have some relevance in that way?

@thjeokthjeok443

6 жыл бұрын

seiryu , are you speaking of those countries now in time ? cause they are filled with the overflow of the overpopulated from other countries - who are consuming at an alarming rate . Even here in australia - when i do go to a city , i see every nationality but Australians , consuming heaps , both white and black Australian are not high consumers .

My teacher based his lesson on this video xd

Why not just invest in underwater colony tech. I actually made a whole Idea as how people can live independantly and sustainablly. underwater. The only problems (that I can recall) is a nitrogenized atmosphere.

Also 100 billion people would be no big deal, it would mean a city like new york the size of the US, without anyone living anywhere else.

hahaa nice!

Yeah.. there's so much food now, no-one in the world is starving .. therefore unless/until there are NO STARVING PEOPLE in this world Thomas Malthus will AWAYS BE RIGHT % -)

how can you talk about the line, and not use the words "carrying capacity"

Shout out to the Bangladeshis....

The US has 5 or 6 percent of the world population and it consumes 25 percent of the world's ressources and it is probably valid for us in Canada too but nowhere else in the world is it so unbalanced. As unpleasant as it may sound, our irresponsible consumption makes us responsible for the lack of ressources in other countries like India for example. More money = more education = lower fertility rates = world population kept in check, but are we willing to stop filling up the Hummer for a Sunday afternoon ride to nowhere? Do we understand that the earth's ressources are limited? Not really, we are FREE and no one can tell us what to do, the rest of the world be damned. The only way for some to get rich is for others to be poor... but it's always been that way hasn't it?

@thjeokthjeok443

6 жыл бұрын

Roses how do they work out consumption in a third world country - do they add up all they have hunted to extinction , the fish the animals , the bugs , etc... i often wondered how they could even compare that ? think about it . And you need to look at what is happening today in the world - you will find India can send a man to space but does not improve its infrastructure for all its people . It also has a cast system which is questionable . More developed countries actually give rights to nature and environment then third world countries . Now we come to some being rich and keeping the others poor ? we all have choices - will you work 7 days a week to get a house my father did - look at all the people that work 9 to 5 jobs 5 days or even 6 days a week for years and years . i think you have listened to too much propaganda !

your introduccion is so longgggg...

I encourage everyone to watch Zeitgeist Addendum and Zeitgeist: Moving Forward.

when you are from Bangladesh and now you are scared that your neighbor might come to end you for resources XD

is this theory happen right now?

Yet regarding his analyses: it is the exact inverse: the population increases actually enable far greater degrees of increases in food production in human existence. So he got it exactly backwards- and before his metanoia, he was advocating murder, so he really was a useless villain.

If we multiply our population by 30, we come up with 9.3 billion

The good thing about maths...it's irrefutable. And this...it's all math. There were 2 B when I was in college in '73. Same stuff, just more people and more hungry mouths.

@phaggott

7 жыл бұрын

so you're older than 5Billions of us

@dennistedder3384

7 жыл бұрын

Adol Flynn Hey, nice math. And through experience, probably a lot smarter.

@phaggott

7 жыл бұрын

Dennis Tedder I want to believe you

@dennistedder3384

7 жыл бұрын

Adol Flynn As Indiana Jones would say: "Trust me."

@followingtheroe1952

3 жыл бұрын

It uses math but at the end of the day its human speculation and interpretation. Just because math has infallible qualities doesnt mean i can use it to justify my speculation outright. You have to take alot for granted with malthuses interpretation of population.

I think Malthus is still right, while we do not reproduce as rapidly and food is plentiful we consume other resources which are quite limited like oil and coal. I think if the entire world became like the west our Malthusian limit wouldn't go away, if we all wanted to keep the western lifestyle that allowed the low population growth (without a government mandate) we'd have a different struggle - energy production.

@LNOL o herro der

coronavirus brought me here

@nasdoc1

4 жыл бұрын

Me too. Hope we survive this.

@maxinehill3991

4 жыл бұрын

Someone made a law of it long ago saying the world should not get over populated. Which is scary cause is always a random pandemic going on

In China though, the food supply is going up but the birthrates are going down. Same thing is happening in India, so Malthus was wrong.

thanos!!!!!!!!!!!

@AL_THOMAS_777

Жыл бұрын

THANATOS ?

Well he was not wrong though

Excellent presentation, but I do not share the view of the author on the 1800's as a time of Utopianism; if indeed this was one well illustrated tendency, it was not the only one and other currents of thoughts existed which were very far from Utopian. The most obvious would be the gross materialism and selfishness which developed, but there are other signs of activities very hostile to humankind, such as the emergence of enormously decimating wars, and other odious phenomena such as revivified ugly antisemitism. As far as what Dennis says, I profoundly disagree; maths are far too abstract to ever really represent the experience of life

First

One of the reasons why people don't have kids anymore is because they don't have the time or money to raise kids.

I am a huge fan, but wondering about this piece and toying in the back of my mind with the fact that since the gates grant, You may have sold out. Planting depopulation ideas is dangerous, but it seems less threatening if we put some fancy academic terms around it....love most of Your work, but beginning to wonder????????????