I tend to say "humans" instead of "people" just to be mildly obnoxious, because not many english speakers would use it that way. However, even less english speakers (at least english speakers that I know) would use "persons", so I don't understand why that is excepted when "humans" isn't.
homo (homoj), en: man (people), de: Mensch(en, Leute), fr: être(s) humain(s), homme(s, gens), es: humano(s), hombre(s, gente), pt: homem (pessoas)
viro - virino, en: man - woman, de: Mann - Frau, fr: homme - femme, es: hombre/macho - mujer, pt: homem/macho - mulher.
Not only in Latin based languages, there is a confusion between 2 concepts.
'HOMO' is a human seen without personality, name, gender.
When I know something about him/her, it's a 'PERSONO' with personality.
When I know its age and gender, I use 'VIRO, VIRINO, INFANO, KNABO, KNABINO, BEBO'...
If you are not used to say scii and kvar and knabo, then say separately "s...ci...i" and "k...var" and "k...nabo". Later say it shorter "s.ci, k.var, k.nabo". When you can hear how to say, then you're able to learn to say. English has similar words "gnom" and "gnu". Say "technology" = "teknologio, then "knologio", "knalogio", "knabogio"...
It seems very simple to me. Just try French "il y a," literally meaning "it there has," or Spanish "Hay," a single word that expresses the idea. "There is/are" is actually an idiom, so it's only one of many ways that a language could possibly develop to express the concept. Esperanto has a way of beating out most of the idioms that NatLangs have, so complaining about "esti" for "there is/are" is a big misunderstanding. You'll find that it's very simple if you think about the very base meaning of each word.