How many Deaths in a population is too many in star trek

[Hunter Zolomon]

Sorry, but there is simply to much historical evidence to refute this idea that population will naturally grow ad infinitum. The Myceneans, Hellenes, and Romans all had their periods of expansion and, subsequently, decline. The economic decline that occurred created spaces that, in your theory, should have been filled by new multitudes. They were not. Moreover, we can see that over several millennia that despite fluctuations up and down, the population over every state was more or less stable into the modern era. The population of India, for instance, was reliably between 125-150 million up to 1800. Only with the introduction of agricultural industry did population numbers take off. Moreover, we can see in many European countries that at the state of high capitalism, native populations begin to limit themselves. They must draw more from outside in order to maintain. There is no reason to dismiss the notion that in the Trek future, humans would exercise discipline over reproduction, keeping their numbers low.

Does it make sense to preserve population via immigration? Perhaps, but that would be ideologically driven.

that makes sense because we live in a planet with finite resources and i am sure a planet settled by 2000 ppl and is as resource rich as ours will not have a population of about 2000 in 500 years. It makes no sense, then why did you move there in the first place. China curbed their population growth due to making sure they manage their resources, western nations on average have stable populations due to having no economic or social pressure to increase their population. However the very point of colonisation is to spread, not to remain stagnant, so people going to colonise other worlds inted to fill those worlds with their population until eventually just like the world they came from, they will reach a point where the population stabilises.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

However the very point of colonisation is to spread,

NO, that can be one of many or perhaps not one at all. Germans could not have cared less about settling. They wanted coffee, tropical goods and to plant the flag. In order to get any of them to move to SW Africa, Tanzinia, or anywhere else, nationalistic fervor, backed by economic incentives, had to be drummed up. How many Germans are there now. How many Italians are in Ethiopia?

 

[Hunter Zolomon]

NO, that can be one of many or perhaps not one at all. Germans could not have cared less about settling. They wanted coffee, tropical goods and to plant the flag. In order to get any of them to move to SW Africa, Tanzinia, or anywhere else, nationalistic fervor, backed by economic incentives, had to be drummed up. How many Germans are there now. How many Italians are in Ethiopia?

they had large native populations and the climate was not to their liking. Australia and the united states have some things in common, low native population and diseases so they where prime locations for colonisation. Guess why south america was also great for white ppl to move into, south africa had areas with a temprate climate similar to europe. Guess why west africa was a bad place to settle, large native population, very tropical climate and loads of disease that was bad for european livestock and europeans. By the time germany and italy got into the colonisation game other european powers had picked the prime real estate. Most of the time ppl will go for the easier option just like in real life and in a galaxy of space travlers a world that can support life with no need to terraform or aggressive native population is very valuable.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

they had large native populations and the climate was not to their liking.

SW Africa had a large population?

 

[Arpy]

They're tv writers; they're not thinking of logical numbers. They should be considerably higher for the world they're presenting, but they don't want to get so high as to horrify us 7 billion saps. Maybe they're afraid of diminishing the casualty numbers of real life losses, or inspiring some bio-terrorist but job to try to match them, like something out of Seven Monkeys.

The Federation def should be over a trillion, but the individual species I could see less. Especially Cardassia, who were said to be natural resource poor.

We could imagine even "M Class" worlds aren't quite as hospitable for us as Earth. Maybe there are little things in the air or soil that though within livable range, aren't as smooth a fit as the world we evolved on.

That said, there are 50m people living on THE MOON, by Riker's time. I'm sure there are people in all sorts of environments.

Also that, given the transportation abilities of these people, life may be far more transitory than for us. People come and go and colonies expand and contract as their industries do. If you could up and live in a new place every two years with minimal effort and lots of others doing it with you, would you like to give it a try in your prime?

I imagine homeworlds in the billions, one or a few longtime colonies at a billion, a smattering of others in the millions, and a bunch of specialty or new ones in the thousands. Populations don't have to be at our level because we're basically causing a mass extinction on our planet right now, and many of us also over breed for fear of child mortality or tradition therefrom, and could do better to focus on raising better individuals with better lives, I think.

Finally, we absolutely should not think keeping a majority of our people on a homeworld is a good idea. Given the destructive powers of Trek tech, frankly, planets are sitting ducks. Combat between starships should take place in the emptiness between planets. Take a people's the fleet and you can take their planet. Not every war is limited by the goal to take over a planet or solar system, and a single missile or nova bomb would end a war real quick if you were willing to lose that one planet to gain all those others in its broader borders.