HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 5:10 AM
Jets4Life Jets4Life is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: True North
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormer View Post
As I said one of the UN's scenarios (lower end birthrate) predicts the peak mid century. All I am saying is that I subscribe to the low end scenario. You obviously do not.

Regarding Nigeria, I just can't see that kind of growth without an implosion

That graph only shows up to the year 2050. Historically, the World's population has leaned heavily towards to high-end projections.




Here is a graph of population projections, forecasting the population to the year 2100, where numerous reliable publications are projecting the population to hit 11.2 Billion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 3:40 PM
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 32,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life View Post
Excellent post, Molson.



That post was well thought out, and I present you with this image to show my appreciation.
Great Rebuttal. Now, how about you concentrate on forcing municipalities to merge to the inflate population statistics of your city (somewhere in Alberta...Quel Surprise), just so you can feel better about yourself.

Have you got a problem with Quebeckers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 3:47 PM
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 32,063
Quote:
Birthrates are still above replacement in the USA, China, and Brazil.
This is untrue. China has been way below replacement level since the 1960s, and Brazil, for quite some time. As of the most recent figures available, the United States has also slipped below the replacement level. Perhaps you should eat more poutine, as it improves your ability to conduct research.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2127rank.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 4:26 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,574
More info on birthrates:

Quote:
The replacement fertility rate is roughly 2.0 births per woman for most industrialized countries (2.075 in the UK, for example), but ranges from 2.5 to 3.3 in developing countries because of higher mortality rates. Taken globally, the total fertility rate at replacement is 2.33 children per woman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate

What is with Singapore? 0.81? Do they hate kids there, or are they just too busy making money?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 5:02 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life View Post
The World population is expected to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, and 11.2 billion people by 2100. There is no reliable sources that predict the population will fall (I assume you mean decline) by 2050.

http://www.un.org/en/development/des...15-report.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...0-boom-africa/

You are basing your argument over things you predict will happen. How do you know that Nigeria will not reach one billion people by 2100?

Birthrates are still above replacement in the USA, China, and Brazil.

Birthrates have tended to actually increase in times of political instability, especially in developing countries. Since education and birth control policies are neglected, the birth rate tends to increase faster. This has been happening in Africa since World War 2.

How about we get back to the question you posed at the start of this thread?

How will the discussion on the worlds ever growing population, birthrates, developing countries roles, etc. effect water supplies, and thier relation to Oil in the future?
__________________
♥ ♥
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 9:04 PM
Jets4Life Jets4Life is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: True North
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
Great Rebuttal. Now, how about you concentrate on forcing municipalities to merge to the inflate population statistics of your city (somewhere in Alberta...Quel Surprise), just so you can feel better about yourself.
ok then....

Quote:
Have you got a problem with Quebeckers?
You are imagining things, Molson. I love Quebec.



I have attached this image of Bonhomme, as a peace offering.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2016, 8:02 AM
Jets4Life Jets4Life is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: True North
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro View Post
How about we get back to the question you posed at the start of this thread?

How will the discussion on the worlds ever growing population, birthrates, developing countries roles, etc. effect water supplies, and thier relation to Oil in the future?
Simple.

When given the choice between oil and water, people will always choose water. As 3rd world countires continue to grow, and engulf a higher percentage of the World's population, their citizens, most living in absolute poverty, will require fresh drinking water.

Now traditionally developed countries don't care about the poor, until it affects them in some way. This will happen through mass exodus from poor countries like we are seeing in Europe. It's only a matter of time before economies of the world collapse, and not wanting to die, a great percentage of Latin Americans will try everything to get into the UNited States. this will include:

-hiding on trains
-hiding in boats
-swimming or paddling on rafts across the Rio Grande
-hiding in vehicles that enter the USA
-crossing the border on foot
-hiding planes to take them to the USA

Sadly, this will put pressure on the resources that the United States has. Not thinking clearly, President Trump will spike the drinking water trying to rid southern US states of refugees. Only problem is, he realizes that now nobody in states like Texas, Florida, California, Arizona, etc. have water to drink. Trump will look north, and visit Manitoba.

Amazed by the abundance of fresh water, Trump will buy Manitoba, and divert fresh water to all US states via pipelines and other means. Other provinces will feel the effects of the fresh water boom, but it will be Manitoba that stands to see the economic boom of water increasing exponentially in price. Trump will also outlaw the NDP as a political party, and reverse the damage they have done on this province.

I have no doubt that the population of Manitoba will hit 2,000,000 people within 20 years. Winnipeg will eventually overtake Ottawa, Edmonton, and Calgary in population. Global warming will also create a Northwest passage, that will make Churchill and Thompson grow to 100,000 residents. Thompson will benefit from the demand of fresh water, while Churchill will become a major shipping port.

Winnipeg will hit 1,500,000 people.
Millions will become rich.
The Jets will win the Stanley Cup.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2016, 1:30 PM
optimusREIM's Avatar
optimusREIM optimusREIM is online now
There is always a way
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life View Post
Simple.

When given the choice between oil and water, people will always choose water. As 3rd world countires continue to grow, and engulf a higher percentage of the World's population, their citizens, most living in absolute poverty, will require fresh drinking water.

Now traditionally developed countries don't care about the poor, until it affects them in some way. This will happen through mass exodus from poor countries like we are seeing in Europe. It's only a matter of time before economies of the world collapse, and not wanting to die, a great percentage of Latin Americans will try everything to get into the UNited States. this will include:

-hiding on trains
-hiding in boats
-swimming or paddling on rafts across the Rio Grande
-hiding in vehicles that enter the USA
-crossing the border on foot
-hiding planes to take them to the USA

Sadly, this will put pressure on the resources that the United States has. Not thinking clearly, President Trump will spike the drinking water trying to rid southern US states of refugees. Only problem is, he realizes that now nobody in states like Texas, Florida, California, Arizona, etc. have water to drink. Trump will look north, and visit Manitoba.

Amazed by the abundance of fresh water, Trump will buy Manitoba, and divert fresh water to all US states via pipelines and other means. Other provinces will feel the effects of the fresh water boom, but it will be Manitoba that stands to see the economic boom of water increasing exponentially in price. Trump will also outlaw the NDP as a political party, and reverse the damage they have done on this province.

I have no doubt that the population of Manitoba will hit 2,000,000 people within 20 years. Winnipeg will eventually overtake Ottawa, Edmonton, and Calgary in population. Global warming will also create a Northwest passage, that will make Churchill and Thompson grow to 100,000 residents. Thompson will benefit from the demand of fresh water, while Churchill will become a major shipping port.

Winnipeg will hit 1,500,000 people.
Millions will become rich.
The Jets will win the Stanley Cup.
In a messed up way I'd want to see things happen that way because it would be so unexpected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2016, 5:47 PM
Cyro's Avatar
Cyro Cyro is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,198
^^ that was an entertaining response...in a DreamScape kinda way..Humor helps us get through the day at times. Moving on..
__________________
♥ ♥
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2016, 1:09 AM
Runt Runt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bible Belt...lol
Posts: 82
I read somewhere that the US already had plans to reverse the Red River. Think it was a Newsweek article. As the Aquifer under Neb, Okla, Iowa, Kansas, is drained away that area, which grows that most important of all crops -Corn-will need water and lots. The article talked about Free Trade plans, also Invasion plans. As a poster said it all flows to us, one giant reservoir for the tapping! I don't see our region booming no matter how they acquire our water.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2016, 3:19 AM
Crisis's Avatar
Crisis Crisis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life View Post
Simple.
....
Winnipeg will hit 1,500,000 people.
Millions will become rich.
The Jets will win the Stanley Cup.
You had us all going until you put in that last line....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2016, 4:50 AM
optimusREIM's Avatar
optimusREIM optimusREIM is online now
There is always a way
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisis View Post
You had us all going until you put in that last line....
I believe the hockey news predicts the jets winning the cup in 2019 so not too far off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2016, 5:45 AM
Jets4Life Jets4Life is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: True North
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimusREIM View Post
I believe the hockey news predicts the jets winning the cup in 2019 so not too far off.
I predict 2018 now.

The Jets being one of the winning lottery teams (Laine), and Boston screwing up in 2015 draft, not picking Kyle Connor, will cement the Jets rise to the top
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2016, 3:41 PM
Stormer's Avatar
Stormer Stormer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Runt View Post
I read somewhere that the US already had plans to reverse the Red River. Think it was a Newsweek article. As the Aquifer under Neb, Okla, Iowa, Kansas, is drained away that area, which grows that most important of all crops -Corn-will need water and lots. The article talked about Free Trade plans, also Invasion plans. As a poster said it all flows to us, one giant reservoir for the tapping! I don't see our region booming no matter how they acquire our water.
There are no end of crazy ideas out there. Take a look at this one to dam up James Bay and convey the fresh water south.

https://seeker401.wordpress.com/2009...canal-project/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2016, 2:22 AM
333609543's Avatar
333609543 333609543 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 275
The NWT would boom as well, since the territory itself has 2 incredibly large sources of water and hundreds of thousands of tiny deposits all over the place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2016, 8:03 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 9,388
A couple articles today about water on CBC. Specifically the Great Lakes. Exactly the type of stuff this thread is about.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windso...731227?cmp=rss
Canadian, U.S. mayors scramble to stop diversion of water from Great Lakes
Inland Wisconsin city of Waukesha got green light to divert water from Lake Michigan to its taps
The Canadian Press Posted: Aug 22, 2016 3:14 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 22, 2016 3:23 PM ET


And this one.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...730349?cmp=rss
Amid drought, environmentalists want Nestlé to stop water taking in Aberfoyle, Ont.
Permit for Nestlé Waters in Aberfoyle expired on July 31 but company still extracting water, group says
The Canadian Press Posted: Aug 21, 2016 9:47 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 22, 2016 10:51 AM ET
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2016, 5:00 AM
Jets4Life Jets4Life is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: True North
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by bomberjet View Post
A couple articles today about water on CBC. Specifically the Great Lakes. Exactly the type of stuff this thread is about.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windso...731227?cmp=rss
Canadian, U.S. mayors scramble to stop diversion of water from Great Lakes
Inland Wisconsin city of Waukesha got green light to divert water from Lake Michigan to its taps
The Canadian Press Posted: Aug 22, 2016 3:14 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 22, 2016 3:23 PM ET


And this one.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...730349?cmp=rss
Amid drought, environmentalists want Nestlé to stop water taking in Aberfoyle, Ont.
Permit for Nestlé Waters in Aberfoyle expired on July 31 but company still extracting water, group says
The Canadian Press Posted: Aug 21, 2016 9:47 PM ET Last Updated: Aug 22, 2016 10:51 AM ET
Good find.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2016, 1:45 AM
njaohnt njaohnt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life View Post
The World population is expected to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050, and 11.2 billion people by 2100. There is no reliable sources that predict the population will fall (I assume you mean decline) by 2050.

http://www.un.org/en/development/des...15-report.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...0-boom-africa/

You are basing your argument over things you predict will happen. How do you know that Nigeria will not reach one billion people by 2100?

Birthrates are still above replacement in the USA, China, and Brazil.

Birthrates have tended to actually increase in times of political instability, especially in developing countries. Since education and birth control policies are neglected, the birth rate tends to increase faster. This has been happening in Africa since World War 2.
Is the environment more important than people? You are part of the problem you are making up. There are ways of feeding 11 billion people. The world's amount of children is not increasing, the population growth is just because people are living longer.

You seem to see the world as a harsh place you don't want to bring more people into. Why don't you lighten up, see the amazing things that are happening. The industrial revolution brought the population from a dirt poor 1 billion to a much richer 7.4 so far. If China-style industrial development can reach the entire world, the entire world will be rich, and can use the money to overcome the problems(like using desalination for water problems.)

If there's too many people, you are one of them. Why don't you stop using electricity, and eating food moved large distances by going to the forest and foraging for your food. You want to live with the benefits of development, but you don't want more people to live with them. I think this is very interesting, and something you should ask yourself about, and find out why you are this way. Probably something in your past has made you think of the world as a place where there are too many people, and/or a harsh place where people should not be brought to.

Let's overcome the issues instead of telling people why we are going to have to live with less.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2016, 2:14 AM
njaohnt njaohnt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkydivePilot View Post
I couldn't agree more with Bomberjet.

Moreover, Once the carbon count reaches 450 ppm, natural feedbacks will kick in. (2C --- AVERAGE --- global temperature rise from 2008.) Simply put, the train will have left the station. (Presently, we're at 413 ppm and during the winter of '07-08, we were at 385 ppm.) We WILL blow by 500 ppm before we stop this juggernaut.

During the Industrial Revolution, our planet was at 275 ppm; things are picking up speed.

In the Western World, Latin America, Mexico and the Southern States will dry up. (Not to mention other locales within the Tropical/Subtropical regions worldwide.)
CO2 is good for plants. I support the increase in CO2. This study shows that increased CO2 is good for the world economy(until 2080), even if you accept that CO2 causes the levels of warming with positive feedback.(I have been convinced of negative feedback by ocean temperature data, but you may disagree) Cold kills many more people than heat.

http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.23.2.29

Last edited by njaohnt; Sep 6, 2016 at 2:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2016, 6:38 PM
Jets4Life Jets4Life is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: True North
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by njaohnt View Post
Is the environment more important than people? You are part of the problem you are making up. There are ways of feeding 11 billion people. The world's amount of children is not increasing, the population growth is just because people are living longer.
The birth rate exceeds the death rate in all developing countries. We cannot even feed 7 million people, and you seriously think we will have no problem feeding 11 million people?

Quote:
You seem to see the world as a harsh place you don't want to bring more people into. Why don't you lighten up, see the amazing things that are happening.
I never said anything of the sort. BY denying that the World has too many human beings, you are simply ignoring the problem.

Quote:
The industrial revolution brought the population from a dirt poor 1 billion to a much richer 7.4 so far. If China-style industrial development can reach the entire world, the entire world will be rich, and can use the money to overcome the problems(like using desalination for water problems.)
That will never happen.

Additionally, most of the World's population lives in poverty. You are ignorant to the problems the World is facing. Have you ever been on a reserve? There are problems with poverty, inadequate housing, and water supplies for a substantial amount of people in Canada.

Quote:
If there's too many people, you are one of them. Why don't you stop using electricity, and eating food moved large distances by going to the forest and foraging for your food. You want to live with the benefits of development, but you don't want more people to live with them. I think this is very interesting, and something you should ask yourself about, and find out why you are this way. Probably something in your past has made you think of the world as a place where there are too many people, and/or a harsh place where people should not be brought to.
Now you are being a condescending prick.

To tell you the truth, I would much rather live to only be 45, and lead a happy and fulfilling life, than live to be 80, and be a product of the rat race. Our first Nations people lived this way for thousands of years. What has increased life expectancy brought them? It must be wonderful to live a life with complete indifference and ignorance to the plight of most of the World's population. Just look no further then what is happening with the migrant problem in Europe as a example of this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:23 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.