4 ms·
The most common rebuttal to this is that a low birth rate is better than a high death rate. Even if everyone was immortal (not just unaging, as that would only
by chroma 8y ago
The most common rebuttal to this is that a low birth rate is better than a high death rate.
Even if everyone was immortal (not just unaging, as that would only reduce death rates by ≈90%), couples could still have one child each. That would leave the final population at twice the original population. 8 billion people have 4 billion kids, who have 2 billion kids, who have 1 billion kids... etc.
> Will the old people in power remain open to new ideas and challenges? Do we really want immortal Bezos and Zuckerberg expanding their empires in perpetuity?
Nobody knows. Fixing aging will cause new problems, but those problems will not be as bad as 100,000 people dying every day.
Lastly, who thinks aging will never be fixed? Maybe we fix it in 30 years. Maybe it takes 100 years. But unless we destroy our civilization, humanity will invent anti-aging technology. So we have all the problems you worry about, though perhaps not in your lifetime.
- rohit2412 8y agoI think a more realistic dynamic would be a couple having children every hundred years or so. A couple having only a single child over their infinite lifetime sounds unrealistic. We will have a population explosion with immortality.