this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
146 points (98.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

35334 readers
1877 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I kinda went on a little research spree on economics this afternoon but at one point I figured it's probably good to know if it's possible for, say, at least 98% of people on earth to live a happy fulfilled life at all.

I know there's plenty of people who'd be more than happy to have literally nothing more than a house, food and water, but that still leaves a whole lot of people who want other things in life.

Do we have any metrics or data on wether the earth can sustain roughly 8 billion humans?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] the_q@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yup. Scarcity is manufactured.

Edit: let me clarify I'm referring to things like food and shelter since those are true necessities. I don't mean cobalt or oil or whether else people will be like "actually..."

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There is scarcity - resources aren’t evenly distributed. You can’t have a fruit farm on the tundra, and you can’t mine uranium on Hawai‘i. It’s not possible to locally sustain a city in Arizona (ie food and water). A significant adjustment of the lifestyle to which we’ve become accustomed would be required.

More locally, I live on some prime farmland, with (usually) ample water and some pretty decent climate for a wide variety of crops. Our country is busy converting this into poorly built housing and warehouse space. There are also large portions of the country wholly inhospitable to farming, which are disdained. A similar concept is the ongoing market gardening of vegetables in the California desert. Some people are big on urban gardening and that’s fantastic, but it’s not going to supply the caloric needs even if it’s all potatoes. Vertical farms conveniently leave out the massive energy inputs (not just light and heat and water, but fertilizer and pest control too).

If we continue to abuse the resources which we have available, humanity is doomed.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah people really don't get it. Certain resources are only in certain places. Hence why most countries populations are on rivers, coasts, and other crop viable areas. Certain minerals and fossil fuels... also only in certain places and that has been a de terminating factor in why some countries are rich and others are poor. Not to mention under developed societies, even if they have resource wealth, don't have the industrial/technological means to extract it. Hence colonialism in the past, present, and future.

Which is also why most of the worlds population on livings on like tiny slice of it's landmass. Vast majority of the land in the world is uninhabitable. 95% of the world population lives on 10% of it's landmass. and only about 15% of landmass in the globe is developed, as in people live there, so the other 5% of people are living on another 5% of the land. 85% of the land has zero people living there.