> arguing its misanthropic is a emotional response without much through. Fallacious to say the least. I've explained the reason on why I think it implies that,

> arguing its misanthropic is a emotional response without much through. Fallacious to say the least. I've explained the reason on why I think it implies that, which is: "people that makes that affirmation with no data or maths to back it up". Which I think is a quite reasonable thing to ask. You reducing it to a "is an emotional response" is a very poor take and bad reading. Regarding your initial question. I am sorry but I don't see the correlation. The Black Death, for instance, killed between 75 and 200 million people back in 1340-1350 where world population was approx 350,000,000. Following your reasoning, this shouldn't had happened? Initially, I was expecting from you to give a decent argument like: "There is a strong correlation between wealth, development and low birth rates". Then, based on that, talk perhaps about incentivicing sustainable economic growth. But nope, just talking about reducing humanity by "incentivicing" without being specific or considering the grave implications and then later, talking about your guessing on how covid wouldn't have been a problem.