HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 1:42 PM
tdawg's Avatar
tdawg tdawg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NY,NY
Posts: 1,785
1,000,000,000 Americans by 2100?

Saw this in USAToday this morning. Anyone else find this prediction a bit of a stretch?

Expert: U.S. population to hit 1 billion by 2100

By Haya El Nasser, USA TODAY
If the USA seems too crowded and its roads too congested now, imagine future generations: The nation's population could more than triple to 1 billion as early as 2100.

That's the eye-popping projection that urban and rural planners, gathered today for their annual meeting in Las Vegas, are hearing from a land-use expert.

"What do we do now to start preparing for that?" asks Arthur Nelson, co-director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech, whose analysis projects that the USA will hit the 1 billion mark sometime between 2100 and 2120. "It's a realistic long-term challenge."

The nation currently has almost 304 million people and is the world's third most populous, behind China (1.3 billion) and India (1.1 billion). China passed the 1 billion mark in the early 1980s.

Jeff Soule, director of outreach for the American Planning Association, hopes it will be provocative enough to inspire planners who anticipate development patterns and infrastructure needs to look beyond their lifetimes and localities. "We have to be more aggressive about looking out at the long term," Soule says. "It may get people thinking beyond their jurisdictions. … It's clear we have to think about such issues as food, water and basic transportation infrastructure."

Nelson says China and India are accommodating billion-plus populations on less land area than the USA occupies.

"We have a surprising amount of space in existing urban areas," he says. "We can easily triple the population in our urbanized areas with much of that growth occurring on, of all things, parking lots."

Nelson advocates converting parking lots into commercial and residential buildings and extending light-rail lines and rapid transit to reduce dependence on cars.

"We could accommodate half or more of the new population (on parking lots)," he says. "For the other half, we need to figure out which parts of urban areas need to be redeveloped. We should start asking these larger questions now."

The population projection is provoking some skepticism.

Robert Lang, Nelson's co-director at the Virginia Tech institute, says he expects immigration to decline, largely because birth rates in other countries are declining.

"People are not going to have as many children, and their children won't have as many children, and there'll be (fewer) people to immigrate to the U.S.," Lang says. "I would rather focus on the near certainty that we will gain 100 million people by 2043. … No one plans for 100 years from now except to preserve a national park."

Population projections for most countries do not extend much beyond 2050. Carl Haub, senior demographer at the non-profit Population Reference Bureau, has estimated that India's population could reach 2 billion around 2075. That won't happen, however, if India's fertility rates decline at a faster rate than they have been, he says.

Nelson, who will become the founding director of the Center for the New Metropolis at the University of Utah this fall, says many events from disease to famine could throw his projections off course.

"We could certainly have a comet hit the planet and pulverize the atmosphere," he says. "But what if none of these things happen? … Do we plan on a calamity, do we assume that half the population's planet might be wiped out? I don't think that's very responsible."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 2:18 PM
urbanactivist's Avatar
urbanactivist urbanactivist is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,247
Too crowded.... yeah, those houses that are 1/2 an acre apart are really crowding me in
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 2:38 PM
lfc4life's Avatar
lfc4life lfc4life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 544
if the USA had the same population density as england its population would be more than 4 billion

and it would be 12 billion if it had malta's population density of 1272 people per km²

there is basically nobody living in the likes of montana, idaho, wyoming, the dakotas. Montana is bigger than germany but yet has only 11% of its population
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 2:48 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 35,607
Yea that's what I was thinking, there's plenty and plenty of room.

In terms of resources hopefully they will have tapped the sun for all energy needs by then.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 2:56 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11,931
This isn't unreasonable. Especially if by that time, most of the coastal third world is under water and the resource wars have led a few hundred million East Asians to mass migrate to North America.

The U.S. would have 1 billion people and be about 30% white, of course.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 2:57 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 13,727
That's not a mainstream prediction. Other experts have predicted much lower numbers.

Not an expert, but so would I. The first two reasons that come to mind:

1. Birth rates are plummeting in key countries, like Mexico, as they already did in countries like China, and as they'll do in other countries as they develop.

2. The US will not remain the economic valhalla it might be currently in immigrants' eyes. Globalization of labor is causing wages to migrate toward the middle everywhere -- rising in cheap countries, falling or stagnating in expensive countries. The grass won't be much greener here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 3:00 PM
JackStraw JackStraw is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,817
One hundred years from now is to far to project anything. Hell, there is suppose to be an apocalypse in 6 and a half years. It could be 0.

Lets hope that the skeptics are right, and fewer people are having babies, and the world population and immigration starts going down. More population is anything but good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 3:02 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 35,607
I think the US will always remain as one of the top economic powerhouses, even if that status is shared or even surpassed.

But even if it is surpassed by the likes of China, it certainly wouldn't be per capita, so the US will probably always be #1 per capita.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 3:34 PM
lfc4life's Avatar
lfc4life lfc4life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
I think the US will always remain as one of the top economic powerhouses, even if that status is shared or even surpassed.

But even if it is surpassed by the likes of China, it certainly wouldn't be per capita, so the US will probably always be #1 per capita.
per capita the US has been surpassed a while ago though https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2004rank.html

The USA will still remain a superpower but the strength of the dollar against the euro is the big worry over the next 20 years, if it continues to fall the developments in world markets will be interesting
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 3:51 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfc4life View Post
per capita the US has been surpassed a while ago though https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2004rank.html

The USA will still remain a superpower but the strength of the dollar against the euro is the big worry over the next 20 years, if it continues to fall the developments in world markets will be interesting
If you drop the "island" states (by which I mean both literal and figurative) and the oil states, we're still #1, although the fall of the dollar will likely shake that up more if it continues or even just remains where it is. The values on that list are all done with PPP calculations, though, instead of market exchange rates, so the impact of a weak dollar will be lesser and take time to be represented in lists like that one.

The biggest issue for the U.S. won't be per-capital GDP, though, it will be stagnation of working-class wages. It doesn't much matter if the average share of GDP is $46k, if that share is split in such a way that is sharply disadvantageous to lower class earnings. With economic distribution in the U.S. getting stretched, people will simply decide that if they have to work hard and still be poor, they might as well stay in their own country.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 4:19 PM
mello's Avatar
mello mello is offline
Babylon falling
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfc4life View Post
if the USA had the same population density as england its population would be more than 4 billion

and it would be 12 billion if it had malta's population density of 1272 people per km²

there is basically nobody living in the likes of montana, idaho, wyoming, the dakotas. Montana is bigger than germany but yet has only 11% of its population

Wow didn't realize that Montana had 8 million people. When did Billings become the size of DFW As far as the article goes, totally bogus, predicting that far in to the future is not credible and I don't see the US being such a big draw for immigrants far in to the future to push the population that high.
__________________
<<<<< I'm loving this economic "recovery" >>>>>
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 4:30 PM
krudmonk's Avatar
krudmonk krudmonk is online now
Of Heart's Delight
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sannozay
Posts: 1,649
900,000,000 in McMansions
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 4:35 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 35,607
And I wonder how these people will be distributed...

Maybe there would be more NYC or L.A. metropolitan areas throughout the country.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 4:53 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
aprntly i'm a lurkr nao?
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 35,268
100 years ago, only a few people had cars.

100 years from now, that will probably be true again. We'll find a new way to commute. We'll have to.
__________________
Vancouver: September 2013 + other photos / random things
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you've got, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 5:00 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 35,607
There would also have to be more water. Maybe they would be able to manufacture water from the air by then or soemthing. Atmospheric condensers perhaps.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 5:41 PM
Marcu Marcu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by mello View Post
As far as the article goes, totally bogus, predicting that far in to the future is not credible and I don't see the US being such a big draw for immigrants far in to the future to push the population that high.
Agreed with the first part but not the second part. US will remain as big of a draw as any country over the next 50 years. In spite of all of the growth in India and places like Ukraine, much of the world's population remains remarkeably poor. Hopefully though it will come in the form of higher skilled workers through programs like the H1B. That is if Congress ever gets off its ass and decides to mondernize our immigration laws to resemble a point-type system they have in Canada. Until then, we'll have a free for all like we do now since most people do not see any hope of ever clearing the horrible visa backlogs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 5:41 PM
urbanfan89's Avatar
urbanfan89 urbanfan89 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 487
Large parts of Europe are already seeing negative growth rates. This will definitely spread to other parts of the world as birth rates continue to drop.

In 50 years most industrialized countries will be facing problems what Japan faces now: social security payments soaring, the tax base shrinking, infrastructure downsizing, and so on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 5:55 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11,931
Germany is already facing that problem. The elderly are too politically powerful. And this is a problem that will grow in the United States as baby boomers age as well. European countries with negative growth, in particular, are in danger of becoming societies where elderly pensioners squeeze the young and destroy the economy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 6:25 PM
urbanactivist's Avatar
urbanactivist urbanactivist is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 3,247
I think that the current economic slump is helping to regulate the US in a lot of ways... it has made people aware of global warming, and the absolute necessity for sustainable energies. Oil conservation is now a must for people who couldn't have cared less in the 90s. Global food concerns have made the US more vulnerable, but also will help us to improve how we use the vast resources that we are blessed with. I don't see 1 billion anytime soon, as the population is also continuing to diversify... with large families being less of a priority, couples waiting longer and longer to have kids, and the ever-increasing gay and lesbian population. Astronomical growth is unlikely, but smart growth will soon be the norm.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2008, 7:56 PM
JDRCRASH's Avatar
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is online now
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,739
Considering future technologies, this doesn't suprise me, quite frankly.

What many don't realize is that China's population will have aged considerably by that time; so they're economy will likely collapse, sending extra amounts of people to the United States. This is the same thing that will happen in the United States in the next decade.
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 > United States
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:29 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.