Other Answers (4)

• It%26#039;s Malthus, not Mathus. Many of his ideas were supposedly disproven, but only on the short term. In time, people will see we cannot continue to increase the population so rapidly.
  
  Unfortunately, birth rate is directly tied to poverty and education level. Many developed countries are producing fewer babies than people are dieing. Some of these countries continue to grow due to immigration.
  
  In order to solve the population problem, we need to solve the poverty and education problems.
  
  Jeblanc- Higher prices reduce demand for many things, but when it comes to food that reduction comes through starvation. People need to eat, regardless of the state of the market.
• The earth is finite. We live on a bounded sphere.
  
  How can we possibly increase population, use resources and dispose of waste indefinitely in a finite world?
  
  Doesn’t matter how efficient we get. Eventually resources will get used up, the biosphere will collapse under our waste and our population will crash.
  
  There are countless examples of this in the natural world and examples of man himself outstripping his local environment.
  
  Now we are doing it on a global scale.
  
  It%26#039;s just simple logic that the Malthus prediction hasn’t come true - because we haven’t reached the limit - yet.
  
  E.O. Wilson calculated the theoretical absolute limit - and it’s 14 billion.
  
  The strain is showing at 6 billion.
  
  At 9 or 10, I believe we will wish we had listened.
• Malthus has been thoroughly debunked. The problems of resource depletion due to population increase only occur in the absence of a free market; in capitalist economies, shortages lead to higher prices which spur a reductions in demand, increases in supply and the development of alternatives.
• never heard of the guy so sorry i carnt answeyour question