I just don't get it, there are so many examples where millions of more humans doesn't materially improve growth and a handful of people do. Consider: when Cart

I just don't get it, there are so many examples where millions of more humans doesn't materially improve growth and a handful of people do. Consider: when Cartwright invented the power loom, he undoubtedly created economic growth (more output) without the need for more humans. Ditto for millions of inventions happening every day from software automation to robotics. Even more: another million uneducated humans doesn't provide anywhere near as much growth as 1000 highly educated humans. As simple proof, you need education to operate and maintain machines, let alone invent and improve them. If anything, a fertility crash seems like a good thing because there's always resources that are limited and fewer people helps allocate them - from fresh water to brand new medicines/devices/techniques that haven't been commoditized yet.