4 ms·
So? It's not like there's to few people. Population growth can't be exponential forever.
by Garlef 4y ago
So? It's not like there's to few people. Population growth can't be exponential forever.
- mcculley 4y agoPopulation growth is at the lowest level in decades.
- The_Colonel 4y agoGood. It still needs to get lower, to 0, or even better to a slow decline.
- anshumankmr 4y agoTo have a global negative population growth rate could only happen in the case of a severe epidemic, something like the Spanish Flu did a 100 years ago (~100s of million died then). This would not really be good for anyone.
- The_Colonel 4y ago> To have a global negative population growth rate could only happen in the case of a severe epidemic Why? Europe (as an example) has a net population decrease, why can't this happen on a global scale without an epidemic?
- mcculley 4y agoThis presupposes that humanity is better off with fewer humans. I am far from convinced that this is the case.
- amon22 4y agoSure, if you want society to collapse.
- ekianjo 4y agoAre you suggesting we should annihilate the human race altogether?
- dijit 4y agoThis line of reasoning is dangerous, limiting our reproduction through social means is much less dangerous than if it’s in inflicted on humanity biologically.
- marginalia_nu 4y agoWhy is that?
- dijit 4y agoUncontrolled loss of reproductive ability could easily spiral and be the end of our species, that is assuming that we haven’t had the same affect on other species, which is not a given either. “Children of Men” outlines what that might look like.
- ekianjo 4y agopopulation is already expected to peak in a few years. check the maths.