zlacker

>>Simon_+(OP)
The whole world is going this way: Japan is just an early adopter. It’ll be good for the planet to have fewer people: our challenge is to run a flourishing society that isn’t based on continual growth.

>>michae+p6
Citation needed. The earth has tons of resources and can easily support several times the number of current humans.

It is bad for the species to have fewer people. It's also bad for the production of novel art.

>>sneak+N6
How is it bad for the species?

How do you define "easily"?

Sorry, I'm asking two questions that each deserve comprehensive answers.

>>quanti+i9
Population decline is bad for the species because the endgame of population decline is population == 0.

>>sneak+cb
That's a slippery slope argument which doesn't hold up. There are many endgames and goals. Managed properly, the human population will equal 0 someday because we will have further evolved into something else.

>>quanti+gd
> Managed properly

What makes you think it's being managed properly? Fertility rate 0.78 in Korea signals uncontrollable plummet to 0. TFA: 1.2 million small businesses have owners aged about 70 with no successor, prime minister Fumio Kishida: "Our nation is on the cusp of whether it can maintain its societal functions" - sounds anything but managed properly

>>twelve+Ys3
The fact that people enjoy sex means we will never hit zero. Plenty of people will always remain.