5 ms·
I don't think you understand what is going on. It's not the quantity, but the quality. Whatever numbers you quoted, (and I'm sure you haven't just made them up)
by kova12 4y ago
I don't think you understand what is going on. It's not the quantity, but the quality. Whatever numbers you quoted, (and I'm sure you haven't just made them up) would only make sense if there is a healthy ratio of young vs old. If your population growth is fuelled by increasing life expectancy, it's not a healthy growth
Here is a thought experiment: imagine nobody dies and nobody gets born for 50 years. Population not changed. Is humanity in the same position? No, because by now everyone is 50+ years old and physically incapable of reproducing, and now mankind is as good as extinct.
- otherme123 4y agoNice experiment, but that's it. One of the worse population pyramids in the world, Japan, is only slowly shrinking on the base. They are not inverting, but squaring, like Finland, turning a pyramid into a column. Which is good: newborn has almost a guarantee of living at least 60-70 years. Here's another thought experiment: assets are currently in the hands of the baby boomers. Young people don't have access to those assets, and there are a lot of boomers. Once the boomers get cleared from the population, a lot of those assets get transferred to the younger people, which now have all the incentives to have kids. So plenty of hypothesis there. Are we in an Universe 25, headed towards complete collapse? Or just purging the boomer generation? Time will tell.
- kova12 4y ago> Once the boomers get cleared from the population, a lot of those assets get transferred to the younger people, which now have all the incentives to have kids. Do you really believe what you are saying? Because recent pandemic was your chance. I presume you were not wearing masks and never got vaccinated, right?
- Dylan16807 4y agoWhy do you assume those two things are connected?