Do we curb our population naturally?

[ray245]

I am interested in the idea/belief that humanity in general, has a in-build mechanism that is able to somehow judge their surronding in general, and lower their birth rate.

For example, the issue of a declining birth rate in a populated country, where people began to see or judge subconsiously that the area is becomign too unhealthy to have kids, hence a decrease in birth rate.

It is even more revelant in a modern society, where birth control is available.

I know that there is tons of other issue that affects the birth rate...I am simply asking if there is such a thing as a in-built mechanisim in our human body/mind that let us decrease our population numbers.


Flame away if this idea is totally wrong...

[Count Chocula]

War.

Our other most popular method, starvation due to over-utilization of resources, is something that most of the animal kingdom shares.

It may be instinctual, based on the individual's prognosis for a healthy old age. For example, many Third World countries (I'll use India as an example) have large families because, culturally, they have close-knit families and children (those who survive childhood) are expected to care for their parents in their dotage. Those children, in turn, have large families for the same purpose. India hasn't reached carrying capacity yet, so mass starvation is not yet an issue.

In developed countries, especially those with economic systems that encourage the growth and retention of capital, my opinion is that adults are more prone to have children because they want to have them, rather than because a large brood is necessary to future survival.

As far as whether it's genetic or not, I dunno. Is there a geneticist in the house?

[Zixinus]

Colonization is an old trick: even the ancient Greeks did it, as well as the British. Both did it not only to get rid of criminals, but also to make use of the newly (and bloodly) acquired lands. After all, what's the worth of a mountain full of gold if you have no one mining it?

Britain is a good example, because there was a mayor economic change: landlords switched from feudal land-owning and used the lands to feed sheep so they can get wool. With wool, consequently went to textil. Herding allot of animals required far less people then working lands, so there were enormous masses of people heading towards the cities. Colonization was an obvious option.

[Guardsman Bass]

I'm not sure what you mean by "instinctual", but you did have situations like hunter-gatherers spacing their kids four years apart via infanticide and other ways.

[Panzer Grenadier]

Declining birth rates in the first world have more to do with sociological and historical trends. Better medicine, mechanization of labor, more wealth, have created a situation where having a bunch of kids is not necessary to ensure survival. Might as well have one or two kids and devote as much time as possible to their healtcare and education then have eight kids you can't care for.

Notice third world birth rates haven't declined nearly as much.