Melvinotis is right that it's a matter of resources. Vast tracts of land are hardly occupied at all. Think of the vast Amazon rain forest, Northern Canada and Northern Russia. The great interior of Africa. No, there's plenty of land that isn't occupied. Even here in the US, when one flies cross country, one is flying over largely unoccupied land most of the time. It's huge tracts of farmland or mountain, desert, or plains wilderness most of it.
Beyond scarcity resources, there's the impact of the existing population on the environment given the state of current technology. In this sense, we are definitely overpopulated.
Great plan - let's cut down the rainforests in South America and Central Africa and put up new split-levels - that'll fix the problem!
Just before the last doubling of a population, half the occupiable space is vacant.
As a species we rape the land and consume more than we need too, As for overpopulated I think the real term is overreaching. We take for granted the simple things which in turn destroy whole ecosystems.
Overpopulation interpreted as population overdensity is an urban phenomenon. If we lived like cave people, the planet could absorb a lot more of us, but it's what we're doing with the resources which brings up the topic of overpopulation in a different sense.
If we're to live as we do, using fossil fuels particularly, there need to be a lot fewer of us. And soon.
Pray for war or pestilence. Simply explaining things to people and motivating them to change just won't fix things quickly enough.
Well over population is when a species populations reaches a level where it damages its environment faster than it can regenerate . So when you look at global warming, pollution and how we are the cause of an extinction event that is starting to resemble the five great mass extinctions of the geological past , i would say that we are definitly overpopulated. Now yes it would be possible to mitigate some of the damage we are doing , but any gain we make by being more enviromentally friendly will just be undone as we continue to add another billion people to the world every 10 odd years.
Using the US as an example ( I live here), can anyone really doubt that we would be better off with half our present population? No unemployment worth mentioning, no scarce resources needlessly squandered, and environment which actually has a chance to survive.
My vote is for overpopulation.
What makes you so sure that the employment situation wouldn't scale back along with the smaller economy?
It's human nature. Were we to see any improvement, we'd say, "Now it's safe to go back to our old ways."
That's where, "Just Say No" comes in --