3 ms·
There are barely more children in the world today than twenty years ago. Increases in population are down to not dying young. In almost all regions of the world
by jahnu 4y ago
There are barely more children in the world today than twenty years ago. Increases in population are down to not dying young. In almost all regions of the world people are having fewer children and trending towards lower than replacement levels as the necessity to having enough children that survive to adulthood and can care for you in old age disappears. These are hard facts. Given these facts the suggestion that we tackle the “population problem” implies all sorts of horrible utterly unethical “solutions”.
The “population problem” is a solved problem (not ignoring ongoing efforts and regional as opposed to global problems such as Madagascar population/land use issues which are largely political anyway) and there is nothing left there that we can do to solve the global environmental ecological degradation.
- mytailorisrich 4y ago> implies all sorts of horrible utterly unethical “solutions”. No it doesn't and I am tired of the dishonesty of that claim, which is nothing more than an ad hominem attack aimed at shutting down discussion. Please refrain from this type of behaviour. > There are barely more children in the world today than twenty years ago. Nice tidbit but irrelevant to the point, which is population growth. Anyway, there clearly is no discussion possible, so good day.
- smeej 4y agoIt doesn't imply those horrible solutions exclusively, but it's pretty hard to look at the forced sterilization of parents and abortion of children for generations in China and argue that it doesn't imply them at all.
- jahnu 4y ago> there clearly is no discussion possible, so good day. Eh? I was being completely cordial. At least my intentions were such. If you have a counter argument you have the all the space here you need to present it. I have no power to silence you or anyone else.
- mytailorisrich 4y agoThat's the issue isn't it? I simply wrote that the root cause of our problems is the population level. You replied that I implied the most monstrous policies. And now not only you try to deflect but you ask ME to come up with a counter argument... F that.
- jahnu 4y agoYou are misinterpreting my words. I can assure you I have no intention to imply that you personally are suggesting monstrous policies. I am saying that once we learn certain details and facts all that we all are left with that can change population levels are monstrous policies. I hope the difference is clearer now. To be as clear as possible: I'm presenting an argument with facts that you or any other reader here may or not be aware of (I really have no way to know!) that if we accept them as being true (I think they are but am wide open to evidence to the contrary) that lead to the conclusion that there is nothing we (humanity not you) can ethically do about the projected population of the world for the next century or so. In summary, chill my friend. I bear you no ill will at all!
- mytailorisrich 4y agoYou should stop digging... Bye.