- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
It’s interesting how different countries are dealing and are effected by the declining worldwide birth rates. The most astounding statistic to me is that wildlife populations have dropped +70% over the past 50 years. Frankly, if humans think that we are in the right to drop wildlife populations by such a staggering amount, a slight drop in human populations only seems like a fair way to balance the scales.
You must log in or # to comment.
Apparently endless growth is a good thing. How the planet is supposed to continue to provide and survive a continuous expansion of Homo sapiens is beyond me. The only way out is to decrease population growth and refactor the world economy away from endless growth.
Apparently endless growth is a good thing.
Really, we should just work towards keeping the world population stable and bring everyone out of poverty
Not that we have to try particularly hard, the population is stabilizing off by itself
We’re 8 billion people on the planet, we aren’t running out anytime soon
The sad part is that a technological society built ethically might be sustainable however we’ve blown it with run away climate change.
Agreed. Feels like grief whenever I think about it knowing the current trajectory, to be honest.
It’s bad for the 1% and good for everyone else including wildlife, nature and the planet.
as I see both fewer and more is bad. more is bad because of overpopulation, but fewer is also bad because of how the pension system works at most places
If those pension investments come crashing down, the government will just have to roll out a new pension scheme not tied to money. E.g. mandatory social duty where all young and able people work in rotas to take care of 1 to 2 elderly people per month.
that sounds interesting, but in this idea would those people have to pay for the expenses of the eldely? in my understanding the problem is not that the elderly wouldn’t be able to take care for themselves generally, but that they wouldn’t be able to pay for things they need or want.
When i’m 90, wheel me out to the orchard and I’ll watch the chickens. If you give me a stick i’ll wave it to scare the parrots off the apples.
Grandad, for the last time - those aren’t parrots, they’re people, and that’s not a stick you’re holding it’s a rifle
When I’m 90 give me a ton of heroin and I will put myself in a dumpster before administering an intentional overdose.
If you raise a family they can take care of you when you get old.
No thanks.
If it becomes universal and is irreversible, then yes it would be a bad thing. The issue with the wild life annihilation is that it is occurring in the poorest parts of the world. What do we do to stop them? Invade, order them to just stay poor? Import the world’s poorest into the wealthiest countries? Mass sterilization of the poor? All of those sound fascist AF.
Offer education, contraception, and healthcare universally, regardless of border. This would tank the birthrate in a non fascist way, which is an objectively good thing. This weird procapitalist idea that we need or should want or really could sustain 8+ billion apex predators is ridiculous. In no ecosystem is that sustainable, even if the predators are smart enough to stop directly predating in other animals.
We should genuinely be striving for the least number of people that still allows the highest quality of life, with a further constraint being the lowest impact to the rest of the environment. Make no mistake, everyone regardless of immutable or even mutable status should be allowed to have kids if they want, but we shouldn’t want or need to frame it as something essential to continue continuity of wage labor.
I just wonder how much of the high quality of life in the west is built on plentiful cheap labor in the rest of the world.
Jesus, even Finland is being caught using slave labor. It feels like modern moral values are built on lies.
There is no ethical consumption while living a capitalist way of life.
Most of it. If your electronic gizmos were made in the US, they would be luxury items instead of everyday tools.
It’s good. And the decision to have (or not have) kids is one of the few forms of power that the general population has over those in charge. If people are being squeezed out financially or have no hope for the future (e.g. environmental collapse), they may choose to opt out of reproduction.
It probably doesn’t hold up. The idea of overpopulation is wrong because the west is suffering a birth crisis while the third world is having a child boom. It’s not that more children are being born, it’s that their standards are being improved so more of them survive. They in turn will level out and see less children born the better their standards become; so it’s reasonable to assume if standards are collapsing in the west, then in a generation or so, more children will be born.
Imagine how many lives would be improved of people who only wanted children when they are ready had children. Everyone wins.
Eventually all the labor will go to machines and AI anyway. Nothing will be lost.
2bro2b
quality over quantity in all things
