It’s ok folks! A 69 hour work week & a new high speed train line will solve the problem. That way the woman can stay home & make babies while the man works his ass off for the conservative old Uber capitalist fucks in charge.
Yeah but we need this long term. I get it, current economies are fueled by endless growth, raise your hand if you think that’ll keep working for the next 100, 300, 500 years!
The reality is that we probably need to reduce the global population by a few billion and then sustain that number and scrap our entire economic system in favor of one that prioritizes sustainability. Better now than in 100 years when there’s no food or water left.
Human population should probably reduce to about 10% of what it currently is. Basically, as a species, people need to get over the arrogance of needing to propagate THEIR genetic lines, as if that’s somehow important. It’s unsustainable.
Will you be the one to be deciding who can and cannot have kids then? Will sterilizations be optional? Or will they be mandatory for undesirables only? Every study ahows that simply providing decent food and home security results in decreased in birth rates.
Why do people assume that talking about reducing population by lowering birthrates always jump to mass murder? Idk, maybe it’s just a severe lack of reading comprehension or critical thinking…
Because when you’re talking about reducing population “to 10%” you sound like a genocidal ghoul. Work on your own critical thinking and maybe consider acquiring a modicum of common sense.
I read the original comment, and they never said to kill anyone. As an example if people only had 1 kid per person, that would eventually drop the population by 50%, then keep going. This is just an example, and a peaceful one.
They never said anything about killing or genocide, nor did they imply it. Maybe you lack common sense.
We all die eventually. Nothing wrong with that. If I learned anything in DiffEq it’s that uncontrolled growth will eventually blow up the model or find some mode of control.
Reducing human population will be a painful process and we’re already seeing the beginning of it. People don’t need to be killed to reduce population by 10%.
Birth rate needs to be smaller than death rate.
There are lots of things that effect birth and death rate.
He said “to 10%” not “by 10%”, meaning he thinks we should reduce population by 7.2 billion people. That requires more than statistical differences. That requires mass death.
I agree that we should replace the economic system, but overpopulation is a myth and depopulating is not actually necessary in our journey for sustainability.
First of all, it’s Brigham young university. Secondly, higher population doesn’t magically make more helium on the planet, or lithium, or the sand used in concrete, or petroleum, or other rare earths. All these things are finite. Some of these things are already in short supply now. How is adding 20 billlion more people gonna make finite and scare essential resources more abundant? Your link talks about availability of resources within a system where there is essentially limitless production- you can’t make batteries and solar cells and plastic and food and gas out of magic Mormon underpants, these are real exhaustible resources which are already being taxed. Maybe “god will provide” huh.
Japan and South Korea need to get to fucking or they need to become more open and attractive to immigration to stave off population shortfalls. There’s shitloads of south and central Americans looking for stable nations to call home, same with Africans, Middle Easterners, and south Asians, these folks are willing to serve in their militaries, contribute to their economies, and they bring fresh blood and ideas to cultures and industries. There’s also a whole lot of other westerners who are super into Asia in general but especially Japan and would move there in a heartbeat for the right incentives.
It takes more money to raise a child than care for a senior. When the senior dies, that frees up resources which means you need less people. The people who are left have more resources and their labor is more valuable.
The black plague created the Renaissance.
WW2, which killed almost exclusively the healthiest hardest working men resulted in a generation of unprecedented growth and wealth for everyone else.
Population decline is a good thing. When land and resources are so plentiful that someone with a high school diploma can support a family of 4, population will go back up until overpopulation causes a decline again.
Kind of hope covid would do the same but all it did was make everything worst with the housing crisis. Now I cant have a house anytime soon and by the time I’ll be able to afford I’ll be too old to have kids. No way I can afford both house and kids right now. Back in 2017 house mortgage was half it is today.
But what about Korean purity? Korea is number one.
What if the foreigner names are really long? They won’t be able to fit on our shitty id cards, credit cards or driving licences causing an absolute nightmare in our nazi-esque ID verification system. And we can’t possibly change it because we don’t like change. Also Korea is number one.
What about drugs? Foreigners bringing drugs to sell to children.
What about profit? How can we make a profit if we can under pay & abuse our immigrant workforce?
attractive to immigration to stave off population shortfalls
Apparently the way forms and such work in Korea, it can be literally impossible for foreigners to live because the government simply cannot process forms submitted by foreigners. Their hostility towards the outside requires a generational shift. We’re going to have to see the country get a little further along the collapse route or for older people to start dying.
Yeah: onsen don’t let in foreigners, landlords won’t rent to foreigners, and corporations perform background checks when hiring to make really sure that you’re not <GASP> part Korean.
Add comment