[Romulus]

I do, and thanks for stating my case. With population at an all-time high (and leveling off, by the way, according to a report last month from the UN), people are not only not starving, but are better fed and enjoy more natural resources than ever before. Malthus erred in assuming that technology was a constant; the vast leaps in productivity have been possible because this is not so.

[Florida SunGod]

Your theory only applies to developed nations. Population explosion problems are inherently found in 3rd world countries. Don't tell me there are no starving people on this planet, don't tell me China will be able to sustain its population on its own resources and within present geographical boundaries with current population trends. I have a BA in Foreign Affairs so I do know a thing or two about world trends and history.

[Billthedrill]

You are correct about Mr. Malthus, although remember he didn't do too badly with the statistics available at the time, circa 1800. Increase in food production simply isn't really linear, although the numbers available at the time led him to conclude that it was.

We do have starvation in the world, but it is very seldom the direct result of population growth outstripping food production. I can think of a couple of examples where disease was the culprit (the post-Plague famines of the mid-14th century and the Irish Potato Famine) but in modern times it is nearly always a consequence of politics. It isn't that human beings are helpless, it's that we're stupid.