The Population Problem and the Presidential Election

h1{color:#365f91;}. The Population Problem and the Presidential Election

Self-Published by Garcia-Gonzalez at Lulu.com – Shakespir Edition

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution –Non Commercial –No Derivatives 2.0 License



Since 2007 I have been, on and off, posting on the web statistical information and arguments in favor of mandatory population control which I have connected through the years to the US presidential elections (2008-2012-2016) by claiming that population control is the number one issue in politics not only here but worldwide.

Also in my Metaphysics E-Book ‘The Genetic Universe’ I included a chapter on Global Overpopulation which I found fit to add in such case to a subject other than Politics.

I was unable to get to a large audience, not even a small audience therefore after a while I decided to try presenting the matter on a free e-book.

The fundamental point for mandatory population control could be stated as a question: ‘could the global population grow endlessly’?

If your answer is ‘yes’ you could stop reading right now, this is not for you; my writing is meant for individuals who articulate common sense.

If your answer is ‘no’ as common sense would lead you to conclude after careful consideration of the many negative consequences of population growth beyond some reasonable limit, you should keep reading.

The premise: ‘population growth could not (or should not) go on endlessly’, led me to figure out a simple way of measuring and determining what is over-population.

The measuring method requires a model indicative of what is the maximum suitable amount of inhabitants for a given country (the US or any other country) which when surpassed becomes over-population.

The initial step is the subjective part of the system, you could accept it or favor a modification of it but after it is set the rest of the system is objective since it works with statistical indicators; just two indicators: (a given country’s) total population and (such country’s) total arable land area.

In order to measure either the population suitability or over-population of all countries and territories of the world, as comparative entities, one country must be chosen as the model of suitability, then such country’s particular relation of population and arable land could be projected precisely towards other country-entities.

Having explained all that, from now on I will refer to the chosen country and the chosen relation of population and arable land selected by me as the ‘model’ to be used by the system, in the basis of which I could claim objectively what is the population situation of several countries.

One more initial comment, the statistical figures you will see next, should be taken for a moment as being correct just to be able to analyze the system I am proposing, their accuracy is not at this point the key issue, instead the main consideration is how given figures project themselves from the country-model to other countries.

Should you collect on your own the needed statistical indicators my figures could be disregarded; concentrating on the system proper, but being unable or unwilling to do that, you could find in my figures a minimal guide to understand how countries compare to each other.

The model for the system is the United States with a total land area of 9,847,420 Square Kilometers and 16.6 percent of Arable Land resulting in 1,518,472 Square Kilometers of arable land.

The population of the United States used as the first population segment of the model is 321,368,864 Inhabitants (approximately the current US population).

The second population segment of the model is the maximum suitable population for the United States (my subjective choice) which I determined as follows in the next chapter.

*How to Determine the Maximum Suitable Population of the USA *

How many inhabitants could the United States have keeping its standard of living?

Well if the standard of living and the land area of the United States were the key indicators to be considered someone could say that it could have the largest population of the world, you could add the populations of China, India, Indonesia and the entire European continent and believe that the US population could be that large just because the country does well with over 300 million inhabitants.

That thinking however would lack common sense in two important areas, which are that environmentally speaking the standard of living would become more and more artificial, as it is already happening, and that the only way to stop the madness of global population growth (which you may not be aware of until the rest of the world is compared to the model) would be if the United States sets an example by freezing its current population.

Also the US already has some problems, the economy is not as good as it used to be and there are social problems which most likely will be enlarged in a growing population.

So a conservative estimate should (in my opinion) regard the current population of the US as suitable but it should doubt very much that political problem fixing, even if excellent will in the future prevent things to get worse under additional population growth.

Having made up my mind on freezing the US population the second population segment of the system model I set at 330,102,548 Inhabitants which would be the maximum population after which the United States would be overpopulated.

Do not worry about how I determined the exact figure; remember that this is still the subjective part of the system (setting up the country-model which is to be compared against other countries) what matters currently in my argument is that the set figure gives the United States 8,733,684 Inhabitants of additional growth.

The additional growth contemplated is needed for the period of time the country would take to implement mandatory population control which I have proposed previously to become a federally mandated legislation that would limit procreation to two children per woman in the United States, and next I will present to you a comparison of the United States population situation versus the situation of some of the most overpopulated countries of the world.

Having set the Model for the system, the key indicator you must take into account to get an accurate proportional comparison among countries is ‘Square Meters of Arable Land per Inhabitant’.

The figure for the system model (the United States) is 4,600 meters of arable land per inhabitant.

So basically, what the system tells you is: if a given country, no matter its land area or its population has 4,600 meters of arable land per inhabitant it is as suitable as the US in population size.

On the one hand if such country has more than 4,600 meters of arable land per inhabitant its population could be larger and it could be calculated exactly how larger it could be while it remains suitable.

On the other hand if such country has less than 4,600 meters of arable land per inhabitant its population should be smaller (it should be reduced) and it could be calculated exactly how much it should be reduced to be suitable.

As a side note before I continue, one argument I make in favor of using Arable Land per Capita as the key indicator for population suitability is that the problem of Global Warming (which is a population problem) calls for large extensions of crop land utilized for bio-fuel production (I strongly oppose nuclear power) therefore a given country’s population should not be larger than what the bio-degradable source energy that its land could produce affords.

The system’s intent is to determine how many inhabitants are afforded by a given Arable Land extension, which means if land (x) could produce (y) watts of biodegradable source energy the population of such land should not be larger than the inhabitants that could be supplied by (y) watts

Note on the Initial Example: with the standard set at 4,600 meters of arable land per capita the United States could have a maximum of 330,102,548 Inhabitants to be regarded as suitably populated however my determination in this first step is not based on a calculation of the watts of energy that could be produced by the US land, experts would figure that out, it is only a quick resolution made for the sake of my argument.

In the following statistical examples I will not refer to meters of arable land per capita, I will make it simple and direct; showing you 1) a country’s approximate current population, 2) the maximum population it should have according to its arable land per capita figure, and 3) how much it is overpopulated.

I invite you to do your own research collecting the statistical indicators from the source of your choice because I want you to concentrate on the merits of the system instead of on doubting whether or not the statistical figures shown are accurate.

Before I list the most overpopulated countries, I will show the small list of countries which are suitably populated according to the system under consideration.

Should you check the figures and do not conclude (as I have concluded) that there is a global population problem, you could stop reading right there, it would be fine to think at such point that I do not know what I am talking about, but if the result is the opposite, that there is a major population problem, keep reading to see how I connect the matter with the US presidential election.    

The Population Situation of a Number of Countries


Countries with Population Credit – (17 Countries)

Russian Federation

Pop. 142,423,773

Max. Pop. 267,014,185

Pop. Credit 124,590,412


Pop. 22,751,014

Max. Pop. 100,203,913

Pop. Credit 77,452,899


Pop. 35,099,836

Max. Pop. 98,842,500

Pop. Credit 63,742,664

[* *]


Pop. 18,157,122

Max. Pop. 63,971,152

Pop. Credit 45,814,030


Pop. 43,431,886

Max. Pop. 86,265,228

Pop. Credit 42,833,342


Pop. 44,429,471

Max. Pop. 70,651,852

Pop. Credit 26,222,381


Pop. 18,045,729

Max. Pop. 34,696,565

Pop. Credit 16,650,836

[* *]

United States

Pop. 321,368,864

Max. Pop. 330,102,548

Pop. Credit 8,733,684

[* *]


Pop. 6,783,272

Max. Pop. 9,759,761

Pop. Credit 2,976,489


Pop. 9,589,689

Max. Pop. 12,130,489

Pop. Credit 2,540,800


Pop. 2,884,433

Max. Pop. 4,973,125

Pop. Credit 2,088,692


Pop. 3,341,893

Max. Pop. 5,060,361

Pop. Credit 1,718,468


Pop. 1,986,705

Max. Pop. 2,622,796

Pop. Credit 636,091


Pop. 3,546,847

Max. Pop. 3,945,600

Pop. Credit 398,753


Pop. 7,186,893

Max. Pop. 7,552,000

Pop. Credit 365,107


Pop. 735,222

Max. Pop. 898,663

Pop. Credit 163,441


Pop. 1,265,420

Max. Pop. 1,373,067

Pop. Credit 107,647

Total Population Credit for those 17 Countries 417,035,736

Most Overpopulated Countries (Top 25)

1 China

Pop. 1,367,485,388

Max. Pop. 230,623,444

Pop. Liability 1,136,861,944

2 India

Pop. 1,251,695,584

Max. Pop. 341,270,504

Pop. Liability 910,425,080

3 Indonesia

Pop. 255,993,674

Max. Pop. 51,196,543

Pop. Liability 204,797,131

4 Bangladesh

Pop. 168,957,745

Max. Pop. 16,695,717

Pop. Liability 152,262,028

5 Pakistan

Pop. 199,085,847

Max. Pop. 66,195,130

Pop. Liability 132,890,717

6 Japan

Pop. 127,209,972

Max. Pop. 9,193,252

Pop. Liability 118,016,720

7 Nigeria

Pop. 181,562,056

Max. Pop. 73,851,567

Pop. Liability 107,710,489

8 Philippines

Pop. 100,998,376

Max. Pop. 12,121,259

Pop. Liability 88,877,117

9 Egypt

Pop. 88,487,396

Max. Pop. 6,059,261

Pop. Liability 82,428,135

10 Viet Nam

Pop. 94,348,835

Max. Pop. 13,953,150

Pop. Liability 80,395,685

11 Mexico

Pop. 121,736,809

Max. Pop. 49,866,543

Pop. Liability 71,870,266

12 Ethiopia

Pop. 99,465,819

Max. Pop. 32,826.087

Pop. Liability 66,639,732

13 Congo Democratic Republic

Pop. 79,375,136

Max. Pop. 15,277,946

Pop. Liability *64,097,190 *

14 Germany

Pop. 80,854,408

Max. Pop. 25,837,422

Pop. Liability *55,016,986 *

15 United Kingdom

Pop. 64,088,222

Max. Pop. 13,621,711

Pop. Liability *50,466,511 *

16 Iran

Pop. 81,824,270

Max. Pop. 32,216,967

Pop. Liability *49,607,303 *

17 Italy

Pop. 61,855,120

Max. Pop. 14,834,887

Pop. Liability *47,020,233 *

18 Korea Republic (South)

Pop. 49,115,196

Max. Pop. 3,241,804

Pop. Liability *45,873,392 *

19 Colombia

Pop. 46,736,728

Max. Pop. 3,617,935

Pop. Liability 43,118,793

20 Brazil

Pop. 204,259,812

Max. Pop. 165,345.813

Pop. Liability 38,913,999

21 Turkey

Pop. 79,414,269

Max. Pop. 44,672,002

Pop. Liability 34,742,267 

22 Kenya

Pop. 45,925,301

Max. Pop. 12,620,061

Pop. Liability 33,305,240


[*23 Myanmar (Burma)   *]

Pop. 56,320,206

Max. Pop. 23,425,696

Pop. Liability 32,894,510

24 Thailand

Pop. 67,976,405

Max. Pop. 36,539,741

Pop. Liability 31,436,664   

*25 Malaysia *

Pop. 30,513,848

Max. Pop. 2,071,293

Pop. Liability 28,442,555    

Total Overpopulation for those 25 countries 3,708,110,685  

How Do I Connect the Overpopulation Issue with the US Presidential Election

Should the international community have any intention of fixing the population problem it would had happened already.

Not only there is no interest out there to do it, but no one I know of is even talking about a population problem, so a conversation on it is likely to lead nowhere.

Fortunately for the planet however, the problem could be approached as an economic matter and since in the United States presidential elections concentrate on the economy as the issue from which others matters follow, the key requirement would be that a candidate show a firm interest on population control if for no other reason because it would be good for the economy.

No one believes that right now, but that could change quickly if someone explains convincingly why population control would be good for the US economy.

I propose to connect the matter of global overpopulation with an economic issue namely the imposition of federal duties on imports.

The level of duties imposed would be proportional to the level of overpopulation of the exporting countries.

Examining the list of the top 25 overpopulated countries you will find in it a good number of economic competitors of the United States and should the highest duty rate imposed (for the most overpopulated exporter) be a minimum of 300% the economic result for the United States would be a major enlargement of the domestic market.

Some exporters (up to certain overpopulation level) would be able to negotiate a deal under which they would control and reduce their populations to qualify for a low or middle rate of import duties that would allow them to remain competitive, but it would take years for the most overpopulated countries to export again to the US.

If a number of high level exporters were to stop exporting to the US it would be easy to anticipate that each American looking for a job would be able to get two jobs instead of just one.

That issue alone could win an election, so what is the problem you may ask.

Well first as I noted no one is talking about a population problem, but that could change when someone connects the population problem with the economic connotations explained.

Next what I propose is protectionism and that political-economic ideology would be very hard to pass through congress since there are many interests who gain from free trade and who oppose protectionism.

Do I believe that a protectionist candidate could win the election over a free trader?

No, free trade is too entrenched in American politics, and I am not a promoter of protectionism per se I only believe that protectionism is needed to push the common sense population control agenda on the world.

The key issue therefore is that the public need to move over towards population control, away from mindless implicit acceptance of endless population growth and it would be easier for that to take place if a side effect of population control was an economic improvement of the domestic market.

Since none of the candidates has shown any interest in recognizing a population problem and protectionism of a serious kind would not pass through congress in contradiction of long standing free trade interests, what the United States seem to need is a limited time dictatorship to take over and set up a protectionist arrangement and of course institute mandatory population control.

By ‘taking over’ I do not mean a group staging a revolution, rather I believe that when it becomes clear to many people that the US is in steep decline, as suggested by the national debt and the size of the federal government it is conceivable that the American people (represented by a good number of citizens) could request or demand a limited time dictatorship lead by a council of able individuals instead of by a single individual.

If enough people get tired of going from one administration to the next without getting expected results pressure could build towards an effective resolution, and if that was to happen my concern then would be about such time being the best time for population control to take off.

I have no hope at all that the much needed population control arrangement will happen by traditional government means anytime soon, but it is needed sooner than later.

What do I mean by a ‘limited time’ dictatorship?

Well first of all, I believe the democratic system in the United States was fine until special interests got too strong, and furthermore I think that should such interests be ‘put in place’ by a hand stronger than them, the democratic system would be fine again.

When the system worked fine there was no reason to think that a dictatorship may be needed, it is only when special interests become a major obstacle to implement solutions for a changing environment (because they gain from preventing such solutions) that the idea of giving a qualified group a free hand to fix what have become corrupted in the country begins to make sense.  

Should I be the one to lead I would not need more than 6 months to fix the United States, I do not mean alone but with an able group of government participants, therefore I would not govern for more than six months, I would take the job for six months only.

Having said that a transition would surely be needed after six months of deep corrections of everything significant that has degenerated in the US in the last 50 years and such transition I estimate to perhaps need up to 3 ½ years, so the whole process could be as long as a traditional presidential term, but I would be gone from the government in six months.

That is what I call a ‘limited time’ dictatorship in the context of what the United States currently needs and thinking about a governing council instead of a single dictator.

If this political pamphlet gets a good reception there could be a second one to follow.


The Population Problem and the Presidential Election

  • Author: Garcia-Gonzalez
  • Published: 2016-07-11 18:20:07
  • Words: 2845
The Population Problem and the Presidential Election The Population Problem and the Presidential Election