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.
Comment on Custodians
qevlarr@lemmy.world 4 days agoOh 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.
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
gwilikers@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
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.
Catpurple@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 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.