Please tell me why everyone is so concerned about declining birth rates*. Please.
*Without mentioning industry
Comment on Custodians
PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz 5 days ago
Let’s be fair, 9 billion of people living on Earth is already just too much and we are projected to peak at 11 billion apparently.
caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 5 days ago
They’re concerned about “their” people, because it’s declining only in rich countries and those tend to see themselves as “better” and don"t like “unregulated immigration” (while the regulated one costs shit tons of money). Also those who bring thst up are usually right-wingers.
Or to say it bluntly: Xenophobia and racism.
Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 4 days ago
it’s declining only in rich countries
Yeah that’s not true at all lol
blackbrook@mander.xyz 5 days ago
Because we’re anxious about our investments in soylent green.
auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
Because it means there will be a larger burden on (smaller) younger generations to look after the aging ones.
Instead of 6 kids and 30 grandkids, you maybe have 2 kids and 1 grandkid, if you’re lucky.
leftytighty@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
as a society there’s more than enough to take care of a disproportionate amount of “non-workers” but instead we make up fake bullshit jobs and force people to work 40 hour weeks so a tiny fraction of us can send their second plane to pick up their girlfriend to go on a date in Italy
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Things were going well until Xi Jinping became a dictator and China reversed the One Child Policy.
We also managed to slightly curb the population growth in the Middle East before the Taliban resurgence. The middle east is the fastest growing population, and a 1995 UN Meeting in Cairo Egypt came to the conclusion that education and rights for women were the ideal solutions to the problem.
qevlarr@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Oh no, not this again… There’s enough food for everyone and we throw most of it away. Farming can be improved, but then we need to change our diets and how we distribute food. Water is equally abundant, but we can’t have huge cities in the desert. That sort of stuff.
Calling people existing a problem is itself problematic. It’s a step on the way to socially pressure or outright forbid people from having children, which makes existing power dynamics super creepy. Like, you think the rich and powerful will ever be denied this right? The road to eugenics, fascism, genocide is paved with green liberals concerned about overpopulation.
Catpurple@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 days ago
There’s always too many people when you ask a person like this about the population, but never enough people when you ask the same person the same question but include include skin color in the question. F everyone who whines about population.
gwilikers@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
‘I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or broiled.’ – Fat Bastard
Image
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
There must be a limit on how many people earth can house.
Saying “not limit” would be an irrational dogma.
Once the existing of a limit is accepted we can and should discuss what number it is.
PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
It is definitely true that by lowering the amount of food waste (like food retail companies letting their employees bring almost expired food home to consume etc etc). I just unfortunately assumed that we won’t really improve in this food waste area.
Eugenics and genocide in the name of overpopulation could theoretically go into power (or comeback with eugenics), although I think the chance of that happening will be low, atleast in countries like Europe and north american countries, but your point is understandable.