I see the population control argument made a lot, and while I don't want to throw this conversation out the window entirely, I personally don't think it's very

I see the population control argument made a lot, and while I don't want to throw this conversation out the window entirely, I personally don't think it's very constructive right now. What we need is a drastic reduction in emissions FAST. X0% less now buys a lot more time and has a much bigger effect than X0% in say 50 years when most of the damage is done. Any means of population control that is not straight up genocide will take decades if not generations to make a real impact. Long term planning should of course be a core part of our strategy, and whether population control is part of that or not is not my call to make. That being said, the next five to ten years are much, much more important, and my experience in these contexts has been that the population control argument tends to interfere with this more important conversation about actions to take right now. What would help most in a shorter time frame is economic incentives to move away from fossil fuels. Carbon taxes, and most importantly changing where subsidies go in the first place would go a long way. More funding for research in relevant areas would, as well. Before those and other things aren't well underway, there is really nothing to gain from bringing up population control every time the climate change comes up, in my opinion.