4 ms·

> limit population growth where it is exploding How do you propose to do this? Genuinely interested in the answer, as this is probably the most practical if w

by bin0 7y ago

> limit population growth where it is exploding How do you propose to do this? Genuinely interested in the answer, as this is probably the most practical if we can figure it out. Especially considering that nations retain sovereignty over their own policies, what's in it for them? They would lose economic growth. > limit mass migration to countries with high per capita emissions Again, can you clarify? Are you going to tell people they must remain in third-world undeveloped poverty? That's how you get wars. > ask people to forgo affordable energy Again, good luck. Most people aren't amenable to the idea of returning to a stone age. Africa still has yet to industrialize, but it's coming, and with it a huge population boom. It would be a massive challenge to stop this, especially since it would likely economically cripple an already poverty-stricken continent and prevent or seriously inhibit economic growth. They are arguably the biggest concern here; not sure what we can do to stop it. Much of what you're saying seems premised on the "I'm-king-for-a-day" way of thinking.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Direct cash payments to not have children, with the value based on lifetime carbon emissions next of kin would’ve emitted (regardless of where you live in the world). Eventual goal is funding from carbon markets. Disclaimer: I am funding a non profit startup to bootstrap this. We are working very hard to ensure it’s operating as ethically as possible.
- bin0 7y ago
  That's a pretty interesting idea. I hope you don't mind if I pelt you with a few questions; I'm curious to know more. * How are you calculating value based on carbon emissions? I assume you are compensating according to some well-known figure for cost of negative externalities? * Have you done any market research, and have you validated that your estimated payment can overcome the "my children are the most precious thing" issue? * How do you verify people are not hiding their children for money? * You mentioned this is a global program, but different people emit different amounts of carbon. Do you estimate by current per-capita emissions in the nation of the person? Do you factor in growth over time for the estimated next generation? * Where can I read more, as I understand you probably don't want to copy-paste from wherever the information already exists and I've got a few more?
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    Email for details. We haven’t launched yet, we want to make sure the math, the ethics, and the approach are bulletproof before going public. With that said, I’m happy to privately discuss the model we’ve built. There is a natural fertility rate decline you’re seeing around the world, we’re simply trying to tighten the feedback loop (while operating with as much transparency and ethical consideration possible).
    - bebna 7y ago
      Can I be your Guinea Pig? guinea-pig at bebna de
- mc32 7y ago
  While I think this is a good approach given population pressures have major consequences (wilderness shrinkage, land use, overuse, resource depletion, desperation, etc) education is a big factor as well as opportunities for women (there are countries where underemployed women are forced to barter sex for goods). Also changing customs is important. Many men push back on condoms, though not other forms of prophylactics, so it’s important to make other birth control widely available and change perception around them.
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Simply reverse everything many countries once did to encourage children and growing populations. Which translates a tax break on each child into a tax penalty on each child after the first. Free family planning becomes free contraception and sterilisation for those who want it. Instead of advertising campaigns encouraging families a campaign discouraging larger families, and perhaps nudging it to be socially unacceptable. Make any fertility treatments an entirely private sector activity.
- bin0 7y ago
  I'm a little worried about the economic implications of something like this. Population shrinkage might lead to an economic collapse worse than any global warming problem. Government-funded sterilization also sounds like a political third rail. If it didn't take off, what would the next option be?
  - NeedMoreTea 7y ago
    I'm in the UK, with the NHS. There's already government funded fertility treatment and government funded sterilisation. I imagine much of Europe enjoys similar. Doesn't seem that untouchable. :p Population shrinkage will be a rounding error in the face of climate. We already had the AQ9 oil company document from 1980 on the front page today. That predicts the end of all economic growth by 2025. Sure they might be a out by a decade or so, but not a bad guess for 40 years ago! Growth has been trending down for decades. Think about that. Recession becomes the normal state of things. A downturn tips into a major depression if you start at recession. There's another page for men... https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/female-sterilisation/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/female-sterilisa...
    - bin0 7y ago
      I know much of Europe has treatments like that; to be clear, I was referring to America. Maybe in time, but it probably won't happen now (if for no other reason than because no one wishes to expend the requisite political capital to do so). I'd hesitate to believe all economic growth will end by 2025. I just don't buy it; all but the UN low projections show continuing growth through at least 2100 [0]. How will we cope if that's true, any way? It will be tough when there are more old, retired people than young, working people to support them; I don't see the numbers adding. Recession being the normal state of things is not really a great outcome... if that happens, you will get a war, sure as shooting. Not just one, but lots. And a rise of authoritarianism. Liberty is good in good times, but most people are fair-weather patriots and will turn to a hitler-2.0 if things get bad enough. That ought to worry us all. [0] https://ourworldindata.org/exports/comparison-of-world-population-projections_v3_850x600.svg https://ourworldindata.org/exports/comparison-of-world-popul...

by bin0 7y ago

toomuchtodo 7y ago

Direct cash payments to not have children, with the value based on lifetime carbon emissions next of kin would’ve emitted (regardless of where you live in the world). Eventual goal is funding from carbon markets. Disclaimer: I am funding a non profit startup to bootstrap this. We are working very hard to ensure it’s operating as ethically as possible.

bin0 7y ago
That's a pretty interesting idea. I hope you don't mind if I pelt you with a few questions; I'm curious to know more. * How are you calculating value based on carbon emissions? I assume you are compensating according to some well-known figure for cost of negative externalities? * Have you done any market research, and have you validated that your estimated payment can overcome the "my children are the most precious thing" issue? * How do you verify people are not hiding their children for money? * You mentioned this is a global program, but different people emit different amounts of carbon. Do you estimate by current per-capita emissions in the nation of the person? Do you factor in growth over time for the estimated next generation? * Where can I read more, as I understand you probably don't want to copy-paste from wherever the information already exists and I've got a few more?
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  Email for details. We haven’t launched yet, we want to make sure the math, the ethics, and the approach are bulletproof before going public. With that said, I’m happy to privately discuss the model we’ve built. There is a natural fertility rate decline you’re seeing around the world, we’re simply trying to tighten the feedback loop (while operating with as much transparency and ethical consideration possible).
  - bebna 7y ago
    Can I be your Guinea Pig? guinea-pig at bebna de
mc32 7y ago
While I think this is a good approach given population pressures have major consequences (wilderness shrinkage, land use, overuse, resource depletion, desperation, etc) education is a big factor as well as opportunities for women (there are countries where underemployed women are forced to barter sex for goods). Also changing customs is important. Many men push back on condoms, though not other forms of prophylactics, so it’s important to make other birth control widely available and change perception around them.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

Simply reverse everything many countries once did to encourage children and growing populations. Which translates a tax break on each child into a tax penalty on each child after the first. Free family planning becomes free contraception and sterilisation for those who want it. Instead of advertising campaigns encouraging families a campaign discouraging larger families, and perhaps nudging it to be socially unacceptable. Make any fertility treatments an entirely private sector activity.

bin0 7y ago
I'm a little worried about the economic implications of something like this. Population shrinkage might lead to an economic collapse worse than any global warming problem. Government-funded sterilization also sounds like a political third rail. If it didn't take off, what would the next option be?
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  I'm in the UK, with the NHS. There's already government funded fertility treatment and government funded sterilisation. I imagine much of Europe enjoys similar. Doesn't seem that untouchable. :p Population shrinkage will be a rounding error in the face of climate. We already had the AQ9 oil company document from 1980 on the front page today. That predicts the end of all economic growth by 2025. Sure they might be a out by a decade or so, but not a bad guess for 40 years ago! Growth has been trending down for decades. Think about that. Recession becomes the normal state of things. A downturn tips into a major depression if you start at recession. There's another page for men... https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/female-sterilisation/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/contraception/female-sterilisa...
  - bin0 7y ago
    I know much of Europe has treatments like that; to be clear, I was referring to America. Maybe in time, but it probably won't happen now (if for no other reason than because no one wishes to expend the requisite political capital to do so). I'd hesitate to believe all economic growth will end by 2025. I just don't buy it; all but the UN low projections show continuing growth through at least 2100 [0]. How will we cope if that's true, any way? It will be tough when there are more old, retired people than young, working people to support them; I don't see the numbers adding. Recession being the normal state of things is not really a great outcome... if that happens, you will get a war, sure as shooting. Not just one, but lots. And a rise of authoritarianism. Liberty is good in good times, but most people are fair-weather patriots and will turn to a hitler-2.0 if things get bad enough. That ought to worry us all. [0] https://ourworldindata.org/exports/comparison-of-world-population-projections_v3_850x600.svg https://ourworldindata.org/exports/comparison-of-world-popul...