6 ms·

Well, demographic crunches are not really enjoyable.

by simlevesque 4y ago

mytailorisrich 4y ago
The planet is telling us that ever increasing population isn't enjoyable, either, and perhaps even less so.
- eastbound 4y ago
  This. I’m super annoyed that countries consider depopulating as a catastrophe. Instead of immediately encouraging repopulation AND trying to deal with the climate catastrophe, why don’t we accept depopulation as a benefit and put much less pressure on the climate? In 1990, CO2 emissions equated CO2 absorption by trees. All the goals about CO2 are about coming back to 1990 levels (minus the surplus). So 1990 levels of population is what we should aim for. If a country depopulates, let’s not increase births.
  - seydor 4y ago
    If we accept this, (contrary to the hitherto used economic models of growth) then we 'll need to change priorities in economies, fund more automation, deflate all the useless real estate bubbles etc, take down excess infrastructure, switch to robust nuclear energy etc. There aren't going to be enough ppl in the future to maintain this infrastructure.
seydor 4y ago
Probably not, but on the other hand we don't know it for sure cause there isn't one in recent history
- moonchrome 4y ago
  Current economic trends are a sneak peak - inflation - money being paid out for obligations (gov. bonds -> pension funds) - not enough goods and people to cover the demand. Only much worse because the trend is increasing on both sides - old people being kept alive with expensive treatments, dropping population of working people.
  - seydor 4y ago
    There was high inflation in times of great population growth, 70s-80s
    - moonchrome 4y ago
      You can have inflation for various reasons - labor shortage is one of them.
georgeecollins 4y ago
Are they really that bad? There are 8 billion people on the planet. We can support more, but it makes more vulnerable to catastrophe. Japan has had these demographics for a while now but it doesn't seem like they are falling apart. Someone will say-- oh but there economy isn't growing! Better a stagnant economy than a famine or a plague.
- hnbad 4y ago
  Most research I've seen indicates that human population will likely max out at 12 billion and then decline until it reaches a stable level. Except for a few fringe Malthusians, that is. The problem with population decline is that most countries are built around the naive assumption of perpetual growth, especially when it comes to social security and welfare systems. Of course most of this can easily be fixed by raising taxes but that would fly in the face of the general trend to give tax breaks to higher incomes, abolish wealth taxes and prefer flat tax rates over progressive ones to prevent "wealth flight".
  - skissane 4y ago
    > Most research I've seen indicates that human population will likely max out at 12 billion and then decline until it reaches a stable level. That kind of research is based on the assumption that the social/cultural trends encouraging people to have less kids continue unabated. Humans often overcompensate. It is conceivable that a country's population may decline to the point that the threat that poses to its future becomes impossible to ignore – the threat may motivate the general population to change their behaviour, and may lead to the government introducing major incentives to encourage more children. That may lead to the population decline being reversed; but, it may then be difficult to "turn off the tap" of the new culture/policies to stop the population booming again. There are also countercultural minorities (mostly ultra-conservative religious sects) who stubbornly continue to have lots of kids in spite of the social/cultural forces which discourage mainstream society from doing so. That kind of analysis generally ignores those minorities, because they are so small – true, but if they don't change their ways, eventually they will grow to become the majority, and then we'll be back to population boom again. Will they eventually change their ways? That is possible, not inevitable. Many of them have been successfully resisting pressure to change their ways for decades; if they haven't succumbed to that pressure yet, why assume it is inevitable that they eventually will? If one considers that there are multiple such countercultural minorities, even if some of them do end up changing course, all it takes is for one to stubbornly resist doing so, for it to eventually become the demographic majority.

Well, demographic crunches are not really enjoyable.

mytailorisrich 4y ago

The planet is telling us that ever increasing population isn't enjoyable, either, and perhaps even less so.

eastbound 4y ago
This. I’m super annoyed that countries consider depopulating as a catastrophe. Instead of immediately encouraging repopulation AND trying to deal with the climate catastrophe, why don’t we accept depopulation as a benefit and put much less pressure on the climate? In 1990, CO2 emissions equated CO2 absorption by trees. All the goals about CO2 are about coming back to 1990 levels (minus the surplus). So 1990 levels of population is what we should aim for. If a country depopulates, let’s not increase births.
- seydor 4y ago
  If we accept this, (contrary to the hitherto used economic models of growth) then we 'll need to change priorities in economies, fund more automation, deflate all the useless real estate bubbles etc, take down excess infrastructure, switch to robust nuclear energy etc. There aren't going to be enough ppl in the future to maintain this infrastructure.

seydor 4y ago

Probably not, but on the other hand we don't know it for sure cause there isn't one in recent history

moonchrome 4y ago
Current economic trends are a sneak peak - inflation - money being paid out for obligations (gov. bonds -> pension funds) - not enough goods and people to cover the demand. Only much worse because the trend is increasing on both sides - old people being kept alive with expensive treatments, dropping population of working people.
- seydor 4y ago
  There was high inflation in times of great population growth, 70s-80s
  - moonchrome 4y ago
    You can have inflation for various reasons - labor shortage is one of them.

georgeecollins 4y ago

Are they really that bad? There are 8 billion people on the planet. We can support more, but it makes more vulnerable to catastrophe. Japan has had these demographics for a while now but it doesn't seem like they are falling apart. Someone will say-- oh but there economy isn't growing! Better a stagnant economy than a famine or a plague.

hnbad 4y ago
Most research I've seen indicates that human population will likely max out at 12 billion and then decline until it reaches a stable level. Except for a few fringe Malthusians, that is. The problem with population decline is that most countries are built around the naive assumption of perpetual growth, especially when it comes to social security and welfare systems. Of course most of this can easily be fixed by raising taxes but that would fly in the face of the general trend to give tax breaks to higher incomes, abolish wealth taxes and prefer flat tax rates over progressive ones to prevent "wealth flight".
- skissane 4y ago
  > Most research I've seen indicates that human population will likely max out at 12 billion and then decline until it reaches a stable level. That kind of research is based on the assumption that the social/cultural trends encouraging people to have less kids continue unabated. Humans often overcompensate. It is conceivable that a country's population may decline to the point that the threat that poses to its future becomes impossible to ignore – the threat may motivate the general population to change their behaviour, and may lead to the government introducing major incentives to encourage more children. That may lead to the population decline being reversed; but, it may then be difficult to "turn off the tap" of the new culture/policies to stop the population booming again. There are also countercultural minorities (mostly ultra-conservative religious sects) who stubbornly continue to have lots of kids in spite of the social/cultural forces which discourage mainstream society from doing so. That kind of analysis generally ignores those minorities, because they are so small – true, but if they don't change their ways, eventually they will grow to become the majority, and then we'll be back to population boom again. Will they eventually change their ways? That is possible, not inevitable. Many of them have been successfully resisting pressure to change their ways for decades; if they haven't succumbed to that pressure yet, why assume it is inevitable that they eventually will? If one considers that there are multiple such countercultural minorities, even if some of them do end up changing course, all it takes is for one to stubbornly resist doing so, for it to eventually become the demographic majority.