top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 190 points 1 month ago (9 children)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 92 points 1 month ago (32 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • load more comments (32 replies)
    [–] 61 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Infinite growth of human population would hit a hard ceiling on earth resources real soon.

    People not having babies is a good thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 57 points 1 month ago (20 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 month ago (16 children)

    While I half agree with you, that's definitely not the only issue.

    Senior citizens become people to take care of, that won't/can't work and I don't mean that in a "dear God consider the GDP" way, but literally just people who will not be contributing but still require services, in fact likely a lot more than normal.

    It ends up being a lot of neglected senior citizens dying in horrible ways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago (15 children)

    Senior citizens become people to take care of,

    Children need more resources to raise than seniors take.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    I suppose if you are just thinking about things like cost of formula, diapers, clothes, education. In terms of time spent, children take less and less one on one time as each year passes. They have a finite timeline of required care.

    The elderly become less and less independant, the care they require becomes more and more medical in nature, and there is no timeline. Someone with dementia can require around the clock medical care for decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (12 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 1 month 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

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 45 points 1 month ago (16 children)

    After all this time humanity finally created a world with high life expectancy, just to start wondering now whether we should.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 40 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    So what's your alternative? Infinite growth?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 39 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    Sounds like a situation that will self correct in a few decades, no?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    [–] 29 points 1 month ago (14 children)

    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?

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 27 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 19 points 1 month ago

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

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    It’ll be fine. The baby boom our grandparents cane from was an anomaly

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 month ago

    How to say you don't understand sustainability without saying you don't understand it. :-)

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I don't owe the future anything.

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

    Everything ends someday.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 14 points 1 month ago

    Not just fine, good.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago

    Karma for them being dicks.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    they're hiring caregivers like crazy in my state

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    It is indeed fine. In 1900 there were about 1.6 milliard people, versus the 8.3 today.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›