Long Term Population Trends

[PBealo]

While I not several threads over time regarding getting more employees into the semiconductor and semi cap equipment industries, I don't think we considered the long term population issue!

This UT Austin paper: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0298190
discussed long term, 400+ years population trends. They see the world population shrinking to below, maybe far below, 2 billion people. The authors will have a book out this year.

If they are anywhere near correct, that would destroy the semi industry as we know it. Even the modern technology society. No more global supply chains, probably no more aircraft, ships (unless wood sailboats!) , pharma, chemicals, petroleum industries etc. Only local trading I believe, though Stonehenge people moved rocks hundreds of miles as a one off.

Just today I noticed a news article that the US transportation dept is incentivizing states that have higher birth rates. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...h-higher-marriage-and-birth-rates/ar-AA1y9lBo

Off topic in the short run, but clearly of long term importance...

Peter B.

 

[DanX]

>in the long run we are all dead.
China has the worst birth rate.
If they are not worried, why worry?
If they are very worried, wait and see their solutions.

 

[Xebec]

We had large scale global trade with only a population of 1B, and that was with very ineffiicient technology vs what we have today. We've also only begun to scratch the surface on sustainability -- there's a HUGE opportunity to engineer "everything" to last longer. Power generation devices, buildings, transportation, etc.

Then of course there's automation. I won't mention the US's overreliance on trucks vs trains so as to not activate @blueone , but however goods are moved today - it can probably be handled with less humans.

You're right there's risk here but even if the # of consumers buying gadgets decrease, there's new need for high technology elsewhere to sustain civilization.

 

[Paul2]

You're right there's risk here but even if the # of consumers buying gadgets decrease, there's new need for high technology elsewhere to sustain civilization.

There is no need for high technology to sustain civilisation, but you obviously need high technology to sustain arms production, which is needed to sustain civilisation. So many were shocked beyond belief when it hit news that US cannot make even such a relatively dumb thing as artillery ammo in sufficient quantities in 2022, while it was a glaring fact for everyone to see for decades (if they knew what to look at.) US can manufacture a non-self-propelled howitzer for $4 million dollars, but is beyond hope when it needs to make ammo for it.

The same is in chips these days. US semi, screechingly, slowly, and painfully can make Intel's chips, which are made on a cutting edge node, but it cannot make enough discretes, and 74XXX in modern packages like at all.