Well, for a real sustained development, we should use the same one child policy in the whole world. We are too many on Earth, that's well known, and a lot of people will die one day because of this (wars, hunger, sickness.... Pick your poison!).

Uhhh the world has finite resources and with the quality of living going up every day that means more resources being used/wasted. Literally there are only so many fish in the sea and animals on land how to we presume to feed 7+ billion people in the next 30 years? The world is in a population crises and people either don't know about it, don't care, or don't think there is a problem at all. I just don't understand human's, were on the brink of killing off the planet entirely. When all he animals start dying off (already are) it's an unbreakable chain effect. You couple that with pollution, economic troubles, atomic bombs, and social hate and fighting because of culture, color, or interest differences the world is madness and everyone has went out and bought giant rug's to sweep it all under. I feel bad for the future generation's because it's gonna be scary. It's so sad...

I predict divorce rates sky rocket due to nagging women wanting more children.

I was going to ignore these posts at first, it usually just isn't worth it. But seeing that so many people seem to have this belief, I'd like to point out the fallacy.

Human population is NOWHERE near the earth's capacity. Seriously, people have been worrying about this for over a century now. And yet, we live in more abundance now than ever.

The people who have little in this world is not the result of over-population. It's a result of under-development. There are plethora of reasons why those regions are under-developed, but global overpopulation is not one of them.

Humans could, right now, double, triple, quintuple, what ever is needed, food production within just a few years, if the profit motive was there. People starving in this world is not because of others overeating, or wasting food, or just too many rich people. Did you know that European and American Governments pay farmers to NOT produce food?

Disease is another common misconception. I think this is a population-density thing. If people are all crowded together, then it must be easy for diseases to spread? I live in Hong Kong. Did you know that in some districts of Hong Kong, there are almost 35,000 people per square mile? By comparison, New York City has a mere 1,300 per square mile. Hong Kong does not suffer from any plague like events. You could increase the population of NYC by a factor of 25, and viral disease would not be much of an issue (for population reasons alone, of course, vaccine programs and the such play a role in this).

Remember, the worst plague in human history was the Black Death, from the 1300s. The total human population at that time was estimated to be between 300 and 400 million. Human population has increased by a factor of 20. By many estimates, more people live in the USA now than lived on the entire planet at that time.

War is another one. As if war is some product of over-population, it isn't. That's such a cartoonish view of things, it almost doesn't even warrant mention. I will point out that at the time of WW2, the largest war in human history, human population was 2.3 billion.

This post is getting a bit long, so I won't carry on. But I can keep going on, in relation to water, oil, etc. I won't, but I will summarise: people have been complaining about over-population for more than a century. Those people have been wrong for more than a century. At this point, it's like betting against the Harlem Globetrotters.

I will chime in here also. There was a report done over a decade ago about the problem is Resource mismanagement and not having too much population. The went on to give the following illustration which I love. If ever person for the last 6 thousand years were still alive, roughly 10 billion people, and we give each person 5 achres of land each, which is about 5 city blocks for better visualization, for a house and food production use The entire population whould easily fit in an area  of North America, leaving the rest of the world untouched. (I adjusted the math because I found the illustration and people are forgetting the point it is an illustration.)

So it kind of drive home the point that we suck at managing our resources to almost a surperlative degree, and how destructive we are a species. I would also like to also point out that the reason we are so bad is we  usally put "profits" first and humanitity's well being second. Because the profits are not there we allow perfectly good food stuffs to go bad and get tossed when it goes bad, we dump out perfectly good food to drive up the prices when we do go over. We allow food stuff to rot in containers earmarked for other contries because of profits, tariffs and other political non-sense. And because of climate changes caused by our misamanagment the furtile regions are changing in already under-developed regions.

Wars solve this problem.

I know some eureopean countries after world war 2 still havent recovered men to female ratio. Those lucky few gutless men who didn't go to war got all the spare tang.

they already conquered the world lol. They own land and mining resources everywhere.

Yeah  they are really a freaking nation 

For the overpopulation :

http://www.livescience.com/16493-people-planet-earth-support.html

So yes, we can maybe feed 50 billions africans, but only 2.5 bilions americans. We are at 7.4 billions people now, and not all africans... You can also read about the http://www.overshootday.org/ to see that the human's demand in ressources is way too high already, and you can't solve that with a miraculous technology in just a few years, it's also a population issue. 

Wars and diseases are indeed caused by population density, but also population movements and needs. The population is really badly distributed, some populated areas will be drowned because of the global warming, and vital resources will become scarcer. So yes, it is known that there will be wars, nothing to do with WW2 here : http://www.gechs.org/will-global-warming-cause-more-wars/

I agree we could manage a lot bigger population with a perfect geopolitic peace, some technological breaktroughs, a well managed and distributed population, new ways of consommation for everyone... But that's not how the human population is and it won't be, maybe ever. So no, in this current state, the population can't grow too much without consequences.

Yeah and who's going to feed those kids? You can't expect every single person to be a responsible parent. They'd breed like rabbits without thinking what happens to their child nor what their children can amount to in the long run.

I think it's evident enough that China's aggression in territories is a result of them needing more resources for their exploding population.