[Servant of the 9]

That probably goes too far, but a planet with only 1 billion people, like it was in 1900 would be a lot more comfortable.

SO9

[saganite]

I nominate you to offer yourself.

[Tribune7]

That probably goes too far, but a planet with only 1 billion people, like it was in 1900 would be a lot more comfortable.

I imagine it would be about as comfortable as it was in 1900.

[robertpaulsen]

Today, you can give every family of four in the world a three bedroom house on a 50-foot by 100-foot lot, with a nice front yard and room for a garden in the back, and fit the entire world population into the State of Texas with room to spare.

[noblejones]

>>
That probably goes too far, but a planet with only 1 billion people, like it was in 1900 would be a lot more comfortable.
<<

I'll get to work on taht tonight.

[Larry Lucido]

Depends which billion you end up with, who's in charge and how they are distributed.

Also, more people permit economies of scale that allow developments that would be unfeasible or impossible with fewer end users. You'd eventually have had personal computers and an internet, but it would have taken longer. A lot, lot longer. But, hey, the pony express worked just fine, and dentistry wasn't all that much more painful than today, right?

[thoughtomator]

So you don't mind terribly if I am the one to pick the survivors?

[bk1000]

"...but a planet with only 1 billion people, like it was in 1900 would be a lot more comfortable."

The only reason life was 'more comfortable' in 1900 was due largely to ignorance. We were not aware of daily events around the world, foreign despots, etc. I agree that areas are getting somewhat crowded, but I think nature will take care of it should it become a problem. (Bird flu comes to mind)

[narses]

"That probably goes too far, but a planet with only 1 billion people, like it was in 1900 would be a lot more comfortable."

How?