top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 192 points 1 week ago (7 children)

The people that want higher birth rates don't care about higher wages, the environment, or people's safety.

They just need workers they can milk them until they can't work anymore. They need these workers to spend all their money so they have to keep working.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 93 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    The endgame of capitalism is slavery.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 103 points 1 week ago* (22 children)

    8+ billion people on the planet and people complain about not enough people.

    Ponzi schemes aren't sustainable.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    Yeah, people worried about “population decline” are actually concerned about their preferred race/religion losing political & cultural power.

    It’s a dog whistle every time

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    It's a dog whistle every time.

    Population decline isn't inherently a problem (unless you're a racist worried about "your people" losing power). Too rapid population decline is a big problem. We're already seeing the effects: When the sum of birth rates and working-age immigration fall fast enough, the ratio of working-age people to care-needing people also falls. I don't think I need to explain why it's a problem that every able-bodied working age adult will be responsible (directly or indirectly) for taking care of more people. It puts more pressure on everyone, and impacts societies ability to care for those in need of it.

    A controlled, slow, population decline would probably just be a good thing at this point. However, that's not what prognoses are pointing towards, and that's why (non-racist) people are worried.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (12 replies)
    [–] 79 points 1 week ago (12 children)

    Ya know, I have vague memories of reading an argument somewhere that the black plague killed off so many peasants that the surviving ones had materially less shitty conditions for a little while, due to scarcity and all that.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 1 week ago (7 children)

    Great news, we're bringing the plague back too!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    The actual disease caused by pest bacteria is easily treatable nowadays.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 52 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Look what happened after the plague, 50% of the population was gone.

    It broke the back of the Catholic church and feudalism. Peasants got their first pay raise... ever.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 51 points 1 week ago (14 children)

    When the population was predicted to explode into the 21st century, the news said this was a big problem. Now the population is expected to gradually decline. The news is saying this is a big problem.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (11 replies)
    [–] 44 points 1 week ago

    Houses are already kept artificially empty to retain prices. Capitalism always finds a way to screw you over.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    We just never get to retire. workers per retiree over time

    By 2030 it's projected to be 2.0 workers per retiree.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 28 points 1 week ago*

    you all going to say bullshit about retirement, like if fascist around the globe don't want to take it from you already, no amount of canon fodders you spawn for billionaires won't change that

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    increase wages

    Hahahaha oh. That's cute.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 week ago (22 children)

    Okay, but retirement is based off there being more people working than not, so in countries with national pensions we'll have to significantly raise taxes, and in countries without such a system, retirees who are invested into index funds, need publicly traded corporations to start underpaying their employees even more (it's really eye-opening when you realize people over 55 own 73% of all the resources of the US, from money to stocks to real estate).

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

    The population isn't declining, though. See for yourself: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

    Edit: Granted, it is in some countries: China, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea to name a few.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    The slowing down of population growth is real though. Trend of fewer children is across the board not just developed countries. Current trajectory estimates population to peak out in 2050-2080 and then decline, for some in their youth in next 30 or 50 years may not be that too far to completely dismiss.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 17 points 1 week ago

    Population decline is fine. It’s the population boom driven by World War II panic that was the oddity instead.

    In a matter of time, we might return to population levels from the 17th century, and if we do, then so what? A single individual will become all the more valuable, similar to how European nations valued labour more after the Black Death occurred. History likes to repeat itself, even if not necessarily by events like the plague.

  • source
  • Even the fears about the economy and government spending are bullshit. Notice the folks obsessing over birthrates always quote the retiree to worker ratio. They don't talk about the dependent to worker ratio, and that's what really matters. Yes, our populations are aging, and yes that means relatively more old people to take care of. But we in turn also have far fewer children to take care of. If we can adapt to the Baby Boom era, we can adapt to an aging population.

    Further afield, fears about human extinction are total bullshit. No country is a monolith; every nation has groups within it with higher and lower relative birth rates. If the birth rate stays low and never recovers among the mainstream society, eventually the smaller groups end up composing most of the population, and then the birth rate recovers. The Amish inherit the Earth.

    Or, if even that fails, ultimately technology loss alone stabilizes your birthrates. Eventually your population falls so low that you just can't physically manufacture reliable birth control anymore. That's a product of industrial production. It requires a certain minimum population size to run a factory. Below that and we just regress to earlier technological eras. Eventually we end up back in a mostly agrarian state, and suddenly having kids is once again economically beneficial.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Yeah, there will probably be some growing (er, shrinking) pains, but I'm totally fine if the world just wasn't meant to have 10 billion people on it

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 12 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    who will work unskilled jobs if there aren't enough people to do them?

    Immigrants usually

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 12 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    Lower population is generally better for almost all sectors.

    But lowering the population means killing people or restricting birthing rights.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago

    Well no. That’s a wildly incorrect take.

    Birth rates are already decreasing and are below replacement rate in many places already. Fertility rates are at an all time low. They naturally decrease as income and quality of life increases.

    The global fertility rate is 2.2 births per woman. Which is just barely above replacement. In most developed nations, that rate is down in the 1.6 range, well below replacement.

    Total Human population is excepted to peak within 50 years and then begun naturally declining, but many countries are already there. China has seen several consecutive years of population decline. India is seeing a leveling off of population growth and will soon decline. The US is increasing solely off of immigration. Japan has a decreasing population. Same with Korea. 8 EU countries have seen population declines over the last 20 years.

    If you wanted to see population decline in the US specifically, banning immigration would do it and we’d see a decline in the next census.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 week ago

    People can also just stop breeding. Seems to be happening in a lot of developed countries. Might be slower but I bet the population will level off eventually. Or plummet dramatically from climate change/right wing political policies.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›