zlacker

>>onnnon+(OP)
It's taboo to say this, but people worldwide have had far too many children, and I believe that overpopulation is the root of the sustainability crisis, including climate change and pollution.

And that taboo is probably rooted in evolutionary psychology, people have a genetically driven tendency to criticize those who advocate having less children? So could there be an instinctual drive behind it?

https://www.flashpack.com/solo/relationships/dont-want-kids-...

https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/childfree-by-choice

>>127361+ox
It's not really taboo, it's just straight-up a racist right-wing talking point.

Treat it as a software optimisation problem - should you go after a large number of very minro problems, or take an axe to the single large problem that dominates your metrics?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/richest-...

>>swiftc+uF
From my observations the current rightwing meme is that women in rich countries haven't had sufficient numbers of children and measures to drive increased population should be put in place.

This is congruent with removing women's bodily autonomy, banning abortion and banning or restricting birth control of all types.

>>sgt101+zI1
> This is congruent with removing women's bodily autonomy, banning abortion and banning or restricting birth control of all types.

There is absolutely no need to do any of that. Just tax them. Tax the childless and unmarried more. Tax the married couples with children less. Make not having children a form of wealth and tax it accordingly. The results will be achieved without a single sacrifice in personal autonomy.