4 ms·
Except that it will probably barely move the needle. The US's contribution to world population growth is negligible compared to Africa's or parts of Asia. Tha
by dudul 6y ago
Except that it will probably barely move the needle. The US's contribution to world population growth is negligible compared to Africa's or parts of Asia.
That being said, this focus on "population" always sounds a little wrong to me. It's not about how many people are alive, it's about the consumption of resources per person. And by this metric, yes, the US is probably the worst offender. But here is the thing, will childless household/individuals consume less than families?
- jtbayly 6y agoNope. As outlined in another comment, it will be travel and consumption for the sake of the individual, with no thought for what happens to society in 5 decades. Supposedly everything will be fine, since they didn’t “spawn” a “carbon consumer,” and the only problem we face is carbon. It is selfish.
- underbluewaters 6y agoIt's almost as if humans consume as many resources as their circumstances allow... We are at global carrying capacity, it just isn't some optimal theoretical limit but one defined by political, historical, and ecological factors.
- chillwaves 6y agoIt's really the height of hubris to lecture strangers on whether or not they should make the very personal and life long commitment to having children.