The Population Issue

Cathy Covell

[Reprinted from The Analyst, published by the Henry George School of Northern California, March, 1976]

The overpopulation theory is, unfortunately, alive and well. The name Malthus need not be used, but the idea that there is too little land (resources, energy, etc.) and too many people is still very prevalent, and perhaps gaining ground. For example, discussions of nuclear energy weigh the dangers of radiation against the assumption that the world is about to run out of fossil fuels -- this despite huge new oil discoveries in the North Sea, Mexico, and even more in Saudi Arabia. The growth vs. no-growth debates usually focus on the ideas of limited land space, limited resources, and populations growing too fast; the same is true of land use planning. On busses throughout America passengers read signs saying "People Start Pollution; People Can Stop It!" And even the popular T.V. nature shows like "National Geographic" and "Last of the Wild" frequently include grave little Malthusian sermons. These usually come toward the end of the program, and run along the lines of "The rhinocerous' greatest enemy is … MAN!" Then follow dire predictions of extinction and even nods of approval towards laws like those in India where "poachers" trying to hunt endangered species are shot on sight. (No matter that the "poachers" themselves look emaciated enough to be classified an endangered species.)

Academic economics is also thoroughly Malthusian. Paul Samuelson, author of a widely-used economics textbook, says that although Malthus oversimplified, "his views continue to have relevance." "The germs of truth in his doctrines are still important for understanding the population behavior of India, Haiti, China and other parts of the globe where the balance of numbers and food supply is a vital factor."[1] But again, Malthus need not be named for the textbook to be Malthusian. Virtually every introductory economics text now being used bases its entire theory on what is catted "the law of scarcity." And what is this "law?" When carefully examined, it turns out to be an absurdity. It is based on the perfectly obvious and quite irrelevant fact that no person can do more than one thing at one time. Thus, according to these books, if I produce houses, I necessarily give up producing clothes at the same time. Therefore, both houses and clothes are "scarce goods." Since land is fixed in supply, it also is "scarce". Every society must choose (or "economize") among its "scarce" resources. It is also very significant that the word "resources" is left carefully imprecise, so that sometimes it can be used to mean "land resources" and sometimes "human resources", thus clouding over the distinction between land and people. But the words "scarce goods" and "scarce resources" are then repeated over and over throughout later pages. Thus, through misuse of language, these books assume the Malthusian argument without ever proving it.

The Malthusian theory, or its opposite, is one of the most crucial concepts of human existence. The way each person answers the question "Is there enough land?" shapes his entire view of himself and his universe. This is especially true with regard to social problems like poverty. On one fully realizes that this earth contains plenty of land and abundant resources, does the existence of masses of poor people become grossly unacceptable. Conversely, the deep-rooted notion that the earth itself is inadequate to provide for human life makes it psychologically impossible to view poverty and suffering with anything but a passive sense of inevitability. Henry George was right when he said that Malthusianism the demand for reform."

George's economics is based on an absolute denial of Malthus. The early part of Progress and Poverty is devoted to a careful and thorough refutation of the overpopulation theory with arguments that are still powerful today. In direct contrast to the so-called "law of scarcity," Georgist economics asserts that the natural state of things is universal wealth produced from abundant resources that are equally available to all.

NOTES

1. Paul Samuelson, Economics, 9th edition, McGraw-Hill, 1973, pp.30-32.