Malthusian View Relevant Today?

Malthusian views of the relationship between macrocosm and fargon remain relevant today. Discuss this statement. According to Malthusian conjecture of creation, population increases in a geometrical ratio, whereas pabulum supply increases in an arithmetic ratio. This imbalance would lead to widespread poverty and starvation, which would totally be checked by natural occurrences such(prenominal) as disease, high baby mortality, famine, war or moral restraint. However, this theory is wrong in peck presently, because it only considered two factorsfood and population. But these two factors hobo be overcome by different ways.Other factors such as improvements in technology proved him wrong. He was right at his time but information made him wrong. If it wasnt for outside influences on population growth and food supply, his numerical reasoning which proved his theory and was right. Firstly, as I had just said, food production has increased in many different ways, unimaginable in Malthus time. For one, food technology has rapidly improved. The emergence of Genetically Modified food (GM Food) has boosted food production greatly. GM crops backside be planted eve in the most undesirable places, in low developed countries the like Africa and Brazil.GM crops are also enhanced so that they are pest resistant, hence increasing crop yield. From this you mickle already see that GM crops cannot only increase food production, living standard can also be increased. Food production has also been increased by draining marsh shores, reclaiming land from the sea, cross-breeding of cattle, use of high-yielding varieties of crops, terracing slopes, growing crops in greenhouses, using more sophisticated irrigation techniques such as hydroponics, growing new food such as soya, qualification artificial fertilizers, farming native crop and animal species, and fish farming.From this, you can see that although population has maybe exceeded the optimum, there is no mitigate in food supply and living standard. Moreover, concerning the aspect of population, there are actually many means of population control nowadays that werent there in Malthus time, resulting in a slowing pulse of population growth. Firstly, there is the use of birth control methods, such as condoms, prophylactic device pills, and abortion. These methods are common and widely used, and also easy to access. This way, the population can be controlled through the number of births.There is also the increased education among citizenry for safe sex, so couples will not conceive surprise babies and can effectively limit the number of births as well. Moreover, the status of women has changed. Women are now of a higher position than in Malthus time, and they will not be as likely as before have babies. This is because they have opposite things in mind, mostly their work, than raising a child or having a family. Migration is also made possible globally nowadays due to intercourse and techno logy (i. . transport), resulting in a more balanced spread of pile and hence lowering the chance of a place having too fewer food and too many people. In conclusion, I do not agree with the statement above. It may have made sense in the time of Thomas Malthus, but it is not relevant in in advance(p) times because many things have advanced in a momentum that Malthus has not been able to predict, especially in terms of technology and gender equality. So to make it clear, I dont think the statement is correct.