Population

Population Name Course number Instructor’s name Date Why does Hardin think that a global food bank and open borders would be a bad idea?  Hardin states that resources in each country are limited and opening borders to let in others from other countries would be detrimental, as it would diminish the already limited resources available in the host country for all including the host citizens. Immigration is futile to host countries because it allows exhaustion of resources in the host countries, which threatens posterity. She states that if a country is to allow a certain number of immigrants, it is required that it compensates for it by reducing the allocation of birthrights by the same amount for that particular year. This is in a bid to maintain the prescribed population control goals. A global food bank is affected by the rate of reproduction. This means that in the future, the population would by far strain the available resources and sharing would be suicidal. Sharing in a situation where resources are open for all leads people to reduced tendency to exercise good stewardship leading to a tragedy of the commons. They fail to demonstrate a sense of responsibility equal to the sense of entitlement to the right of using the resources. Hardin’s main argument is that accepting rights before responsibilities is counterproductive where human survival is at stake. People ought to take responsibility before claiming entitlement to rights. When a food bank is open to every country rulers will remain unmotivated to plan for emergencies for knowing that others would bail them out incase emergencies do occur. This machinery to transfer wealth from wealthy countries to poor countries subsequently inhibits the population from retracting to a lower level. Irresponsible reproduction increases the likelihood of emergencies leading to the collapse of the global food bank. Continued transfer of wealth from rich to poor countries eventually leads to a situation where all countries are equally and miserably poor. It further strains the environment and creates poor quality of life for subsequent generations in the poor countries. She also argues that a global food bank fulfills other selfish agendas. She states that it is a plot to extract money from taxpayers in the guise of humanitarian impulses. This is because such arrangements emphasize humanitarian effects and fail to publicize selfish interests of special interest groups. Such groups include farmers, farm inputs merchants and manufacturers and those involved in grain warehousing and transport. It also keeps governments from taking responsibility to plan for emergencies. This is in appreciation of the fact that emergencies are certain events that wise and competent governments ought to budget for in advance. What does Willott say about the empirical part of this argument? Willot indicates that the forecasted global famines are yet to occur and despite increased foreign aid, populations have remained controlled without sovereign government population control interventions. She presents evidence that population growth reached its peak between the 1970 and 1970s and it has been on a downward trend since then. However, the rate of undernourished people has remained the same despite changes in population. For instance due to the financial crisis 848 million people were undernourished in 2005-07 which is similar to the number of undernourished people in 1970 when the population was much less. The rate of undernourishment in 2009 was at 15 percent, which is lower than 25 percent in the 1970s. Higher population has also resulted from higher life expectancy and not through mere birthrate as Hardin indicates. Life expectancy has increased from forty-eight years to 68 years between 1950 and 2005/10 accounting for one billion increases in global population. Child mortality has also reduced from 21 million children to 8.8 million children in 1995 and 2008 respectively. This has happened despite strained environment. It indicates that Hardin’s argument is flawed b...