• mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 hours ago

    would it be better if the population was growing past 9bn?

    There’s a stable population the ecosystem can support and I’m pretty sure 9bn is too fuckin many.

    not that I’m volunteering to free up space tho… there’s a whole lot of techbro chuds who think there’s way too many people, but their motivations are pretty genocidal tbh.

    honestly we’re fucked in either direction, but I suspect there’s a lot of reasons the population total will go down once the climate crisis starts shifting millions of people around.

    • weps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 minutes ago

      yes growth would be better for me so there are more young people to support the old people

      I don’t have enough to give so much to old people

    • SippyCup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Baby boomers also had more kids than the generation that preceded them. So did Gen X. Millennials are the first to fail to even replace their own population.

  • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Yes, this IS fine. There’s too many people on this fucking planet. The only reason this is considered a problem is because capitalism and the Bible says so.

    No other reason. Period.

    • Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Since more people in the world are in China and India you are probably wrong about it being the Bible. It is religious texts that encourage more reproduction for religious spreading to the masses and China just has more landmass so more people overall

  • Shanmugha@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Oh no, who did this? (sarcasm. a few people have gone out of their way to ensure everyone else’s suffering)

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Low birth rates are a crisis for capitalism, not humanity. And if you count brown countries, it’s not even happening.

    Pension schemes are not a biological imperative.

    • shawn1122@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Just for clarification, if we’re talking about sub replacement fertility rates then it would be “brown countries” except for India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Iran, Lebanon, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Costa Rica and Cuba and more. Might be an invalid generalization now.

    • ElChinchilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Yes people live a little longer. but the main average that skews average life expectancy/longevity numbers is today fewer babies and mothers die during and post birth.

  • mrmisses@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Good. There are too many people. Why do we want to expand on a 7billion+ population when so many of us are struggling? How about we only have as many people as we have resources for everyone having a good life?

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I’m not arguing for population growth but we definitely have more than enough resources for everyone now. Scarcity isn’t the problem, it’s that we allow people to hoard those resources and we waste a ton of them.

      • mrmisses@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        21 hours ago

        When we can prove it by providing everyone the same (good) standard of life, across the entire world, then I’ll believe it.

        Stuff like everyone has housing, clean safe water, safe to eat food, able to escape from extreme climate swings, healthcare, vacation, parental leave, and I’m sure lots more that I’m not thinking of.

        Once everyone has that, then we can look at what we can expand on

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        “We have enough resources” is such a shitty god damned argument. At least you didn’t go “hurr durr everyone on the planet can fit in Manhattan if they just squeeze tightly”.

        But god damned ask yourself what kind of world you want to live in, not min maxxing the number of people alive for some absolutely incomprehensible reason.

        “WE CAN SQUEEZE ONE MORE IN THERE, BOYS! SHE CAN TAKE IT!”

        For WHAT?! WHY?!

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          You people, I swear. I said specifically that I’m not arguing for increased population and yet your whole response is structured like that’s exactly what I said we should do. Do you even read what you respond to or do you just scan until you find the right key word to launch into a rant?

        • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Well if we could make everyone have a good quality of life and not destroy the environment and at the same time have more people to enjoy life and to help drive innovation and art, it would generally be for the better.

          • fireweed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            17 hours ago

            I don’t think you comprehend exactly how large a number 7 billion actually is. There’s plenty of innovation and art potential already.

            • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Currently a good portion of those people are barely surviving and don’t have bandwidth for art or effective innovation. But that’s not really the point. If people are happy and have a good quality of life, and there’s no negatives, then more is better because it’s more happiness.

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I don’t owe the future anything.

    I don’t give a fuck if our species survives. Why should I?

    Everything ends someday.

    • potpotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The issue is we don’t just go straight from point A to B, rather there’s a long period of suffering.

  • GolfFoxtrotLima@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Senior citizens do not out number young people, however there is almost as many senior citizens as young people and that may be some cause for concern

  • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    23 hours ago

    “Yeah but children are too much of a responsibility and just a headache to be around, and how am I supposed to travel/party/spend money on my hobbies with children involved? I’ll just chill with my cat and my plants!”