I would say they’re inversely related. The more people, the less there is to go around. Even if standard of living continue to go up and have, as a function of

I would say they’re inversely related. The more people, the less there is to go around. Even if standard of living continue to go up and have, as a function of the population, the two aren’t intrinsically linked by themselves. However as limited resources become more strained over a larger population, the divide and quality of life, certainly in average, has to go down. It may not be 10 years, 20 years, or even 100 years away but at the moment we have limited quantities of many resources. At some point these lines are going to cross and it is going to lead to a reduction in quality of life. Whether or not that will be blunted by trends in developed nations toward negative population growth remains to be seen. Novel technology that lets our resources go farther or allows us to gain new sources via space (asteroid capture or mining on other planets, etc.) could also change the tipping point. The doom and gloom of Malthusian theory is so far unrealized but I think it is hard to argue that the theory is sound at its base. Whether or not we can keep the lines from crossing is the only thing that keeps it unrealized.