zlacker

I don't really get the American preoccupation with birth rates. We're already way overpopulated for our planet and this is showing in environmental issues, housing cost, overcrowded cities etc.

It's totally a great thing if we start plateauing our population and even reduce it a bit. And no we're not going extinct. It'll just cause some temporary issues like an ageing population that has to be cared for but those issues are much more readily fixable than environmental destruction.

>>wkat42+(OP)
Don't try to reason with this population collapse nonsense. This has always been about racists fearing that "not enough" white westerners are being born, or about industrialists wanting infinite growth. For some prominent technocrats it's both.

>>wkat42+(OP)
I think it’s more of a “be fruitful and multiply” thing than an actual existential threat thing. You can see many of loudest people talking about it either have religious undertones or want more peasants to work the factories.

Demographic shift will certainly upset the status quo, but we will figure out how to deal with it.

>>wkat42+(OP)
I think a good part of it is fear of a black planet.

>>wkat42+(OP)
Racist fears of "replacement", mostly.

>>torlok+71
The welfare state is predicated on a pyramid-shaped population.

Also: people deride infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty. If global markets were repriced tomorrow to expect no future growth, economies would collapse.

There may be a way to accept low or no growth without economic collapse, but if there is no one has figured it out yet. That's nothing to be cavalier about.

>>gmoot+p9
The welfare state isnt predicated on a pyramid shape but the continued growth of the stock market and endless GDP growth certainly is.

>infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty

It's overstated. The preconditions for GDP growth - namely lack of war and corruption are probably more responsible than the growth itself.

>>wkat42+(OP)
It's the only way to increase profits under capitalism in the long term once you've optimized the technology.

>>wkat42+(OP)
> I don't really get the American preoccupation with birth rates.

Japan is currently in the finding out phase of this problem.

>>wkat42+(OP)
The planet is absolutely not over populated.

Overcrowded cities and housing costs aren't an overpopulation problem but a problem of concentrating economic activity in certain places.

>>wkat42+(OP)
We are most certainly not "overpopulated" in any way. Usage per person is what the issue is.

And no society, ever, has had a good standard of living with a shrinking population. You are advocating for all young people to toil their entire lives taking care of an ever-aging population.

>>ahtihn+qy
there's 70% less wild animals than there were 30 years ago

>>wkat42+(OP)
We are not overpopulated.

I hate the type of people that hammer the idea that society needs to double or triple the birthrate (Elon Musk), but as it currently stands, countries like South Korea, Japan, USA, China, and Germany risk extinction or economic collapse in 4-5 generations if the birth rate doesn't rise or the way we guarantee welfare doesn't change.

>>gmoot+p9
> The welfare state is predicated on a pyramid-shaped population.

America isn't a welfare state, I think this much is clear :) It's welfare for the rich only.

> Also: people deride infinite growth, but growth is what is responsible for lifting large portions of the population out of poverty. If global markets were repriced tomorrow to expect no future growth, economies would collapse.

We don't have infinite resources so infinite growth is just impossible. And a fairer distribution of wealth can also lift populations out of poverty. The problem is the people that have a lot of wealth also have a lot of power they can wield to keep it that way.

>>ahtihn+qy
Yes it is. It's not about space to live. It's about resources that are running out (and thus causing wars over them and other instability).

>>ttw44+F62
We're not really overpopulated yet because the majority of humanity doesn't have two cents to rub against each other. They also want their cars, their houses, their netflix. This is what will really kill the planet.

>>wkat42+Tg5
I don't disagree with this either. Capitalism requires a constant stream of new people to operate effectively to increase labor output. This is the system we've been dependent on. We wouldn't need a >2.5 birthrate to maintain all of our water, electrical, and communication systems.