6 ms·

Yes, there is work to be done. But I really really dislike the overpopulation and “tough decisions” narrative because: 1) It places the onus and blame on the p

Yes, there is work to be done. But I really really dislike the overpopulation and “tough decisions” narrative because: 1) It places the onus and blame on the people that are currently not the problem. 2) It implies that we must force people to have fewer kids, when evidence shows that women universally want to have fewer kids given the choice. We don’t need to coerce them, we need to help them.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
Physical systems don't really care how distasteful ideas are. I don't mean to be rude, at all, but facts are life isn't fair. Climate systems don't sit around arguing over the equitability of development rights based on who emitted carbon when. Rich countries burned fossil fuels for 100+ years to develop. Does anyone think those countries are going to revert to much lower standards (somewhere between European and developing country standards) to give that same advantage to developing countries? Absolutely not. EDIT: I want to be very clear before my edit window expires; I do not believe anyone should be forced not to have kids (although I would be onboard paying folks who choose not to have kids a direct transfer payment, just as it's not taboo to pay people to have kids and many governments do it). But I also believe no one should have one or many kids if their socioeconomic circumstances don't allow for it. We should absolutely strive to empower and educate women, as you mention this causes a natural decline in fertility rates [1]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate#empowerment-of-women https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate#empowerment-of-wom...
- fsloth 5y ago
  "But I also believe no one should have one or many kids if their economic circumstances don't allow for it." In EU area you can have as many children you like and the social safety nets will generally carry you trough caring for your child. I suggest you use some other means of argumentation than wealth of parents, as that is a non-issue here (mostly).
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    Europe is also well below its replacement rate at ~1.5 children per woman.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  > I don't mean to be rude, at all, but facts are life isn't fair. Climate systems don't sit around arguing over the equitability of development rights based on who emitted carbon when. I’ll put it simpler: you are completely wrong about what needs to be done and by whom. Accidentally or not, you are repeating the narrative of eugenicists who are obsessed with over population in the global south, rather than the actual facts on the ground. We need to focus on de-carbonizing our industry, rather than the reproduction rate of those who currently consume the fewest resources per capita.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    I argue helping people live better lives through education, robust family planning options and availability, and direct cash payments is not eugenics, but feel free to call me whatever you'd like. I'm comfortable with my position based on a foundation of empathy and pragmatism. I believe all human beings should be treated with dignity and respect.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      I’m not calling you a eugenicist, I am worried you’re accidentally repeating their points. We absolutely can and should do what we can to help the global south, but focusing on over population as a source of our ills is a eugenicist talking point. The problem is, and always has been our dependence on fossil fuels to increase our standard of living. Solve that, and the difference between 7-10billion humans is moot
      - Method-X 5y ago
        This is probably not a popular opinion here, but I'm actually quite optimistic on our transition from fossil fuels to renewables. Things have been progressing nicely and I expect that progress to dramatically accelerate over the next 15 years.
giantg2 5y ago
"It places the onus and blame on the people that are currently not the problem." This isn't necessarily true. There are many families in developed countries that have more than 2 kids. If you limit families to 2 kids then you could see the fertility rate drop lower (ideally fertility and immigration growth together would be under the replacement rate in developed countries). "It implies that we must force people to have fewer kids, when evidence shows that women universally want to have fewer kids given the choice. We don’t need to coerce them, we need to help them." This is generally true, but ignores outliers and the association with other factors. You generally only see the decline in fertility rate in areas that have lower infant mortality, which is also usually associated with a more modern lifestyle and economic conditions. You still have a subset of women in developed countries having a ton of kids for other reasons, like they want a big family, or religious things like the Hassidic community.
- garden_hermit 5y ago
  Whats wrong with some people having many kids, if the average still remains low?
  - giantg2 5y ago
    If the average is low enough, then nothing. If the goal is to reduce consumption in high consumption developed countries, then you need it to drop low enough that the total population growth is at or below replacement (like birth rate + immigration).

toomuchtodo 5y ago

Physical systems don't really care how distasteful ideas are. I don't mean to be rude, at all, but facts are life isn't fair. Climate systems don't sit around arguing over the equitability of development rights based on who emitted carbon when. Rich countries burned fossil fuels for 100+ years to develop. Does anyone think those countries are going to revert to much lower standards (somewhere between European and developing country standards) to give that same advantage to developing countries? Absolutely not. EDIT: I want to be very clear before my edit window expires; I do not believe anyone should be forced not to have kids (although I would be onboard paying folks who choose not to have kids a direct transfer payment, just as it's not taboo to pay people to have kids and many governments do it). But I also believe no one should have one or many kids if their socioeconomic circumstances don't allow for it. We should absolutely strive to empower and educate women, as you mention this causes a natural decline in fertility rates [1]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate#empowerment-of-women https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate#empowerment-of-wom...

fsloth 5y ago
"But I also believe no one should have one or many kids if their economic circumstances don't allow for it." In EU area you can have as many children you like and the social safety nets will generally carry you trough caring for your child. I suggest you use some other means of argumentation than wealth of parents, as that is a non-issue here (mostly).
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  Europe is also well below its replacement rate at ~1.5 children per woman.
ashtonkem 5y ago
> I don't mean to be rude, at all, but facts are life isn't fair. Climate systems don't sit around arguing over the equitability of development rights based on who emitted carbon when. I’ll put it simpler: you are completely wrong about what needs to be done and by whom. Accidentally or not, you are repeating the narrative of eugenicists who are obsessed with over population in the global south, rather than the actual facts on the ground. We need to focus on de-carbonizing our industry, rather than the reproduction rate of those who currently consume the fewest resources per capita.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  I argue helping people live better lives through education, robust family planning options and availability, and direct cash payments is not eugenics, but feel free to call me whatever you'd like. I'm comfortable with my position based on a foundation of empathy and pragmatism. I believe all human beings should be treated with dignity and respect.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    I’m not calling you a eugenicist, I am worried you’re accidentally repeating their points. We absolutely can and should do what we can to help the global south, but focusing on over population as a source of our ills is a eugenicist talking point. The problem is, and always has been our dependence on fossil fuels to increase our standard of living. Solve that, and the difference between 7-10billion humans is moot
    - Method-X 5y ago
      This is probably not a popular opinion here, but I'm actually quite optimistic on our transition from fossil fuels to renewables. Things have been progressing nicely and I expect that progress to dramatically accelerate over the next 15 years.

giantg2 5y ago

"It places the onus and blame on the people that are currently not the problem." This isn't necessarily true. There are many families in developed countries that have more than 2 kids. If you limit families to 2 kids then you could see the fertility rate drop lower (ideally fertility and immigration growth together would be under the replacement rate in developed countries). "It implies that we must force people to have fewer kids, when evidence shows that women universally want to have fewer kids given the choice. We don’t need to coerce them, we need to help them." This is generally true, but ignores outliers and the association with other factors. You generally only see the decline in fertility rate in areas that have lower infant mortality, which is also usually associated with a more modern lifestyle and economic conditions. You still have a subset of women in developed countries having a ton of kids for other reasons, like they want a big family, or religious things like the Hassidic community.

garden_hermit 5y ago
Whats wrong with some people having many kids, if the average still remains low?
- giantg2 5y ago
  If the average is low enough, then nothing. If the goal is to reduce consumption in high consumption developed countries, then you need it to drop low enough that the total population growth is at or below replacement (like birth rate + immigration).