I'm going to go contrarian and say no. There need to be more. Before I get ecoterrorists looking up my home address, let me state that the planet's gas balanc

I'm going to go contrarian and say no. There need to be more. Before I get ecoterrorists looking up my home address, let me state that the planet's gas balance and biodiversity are unequivocally getting thrown way out of whack by the impact humans have and are having. Given how the plurality of human beings are subsistence farmers who aren't really moving the needle much, beaming them all to a faraway planet just for the "too many people" problem would have almost no positive impact on the planet. We could do bad all by ourselves with less than 1 billion on the planet. If you therefore treat the impact to nature as a separate problem, then exclusive of that, people are a good thing as far as other people go. There are limited physical resources, but social resources push the balance the other way. Humans need other humans to survive. Scale back America to 30 million people, and think what would happen to our comfort level and technological innovation. Having less people to justify your own existence through selling your own products or services takes a lot away from you. Imagine losing 9 out of 10 choices at the store. It's hard to see the benefits other people give you when you're staring at an ocean of them on the 101, or waiting until your group number to board, or waiting for your reservation at the local brasserie. But without them there'd be no 101, no airport, and no local brasserie. And if you're single, if you thought finding Mr. or Ms. Right was difficult before..