4 ms·

Maybe we shouldn't worry about the population, maybe we could change the way economy works? The model we are using basically count people as slaves, the output

Maybe we shouldn't worry about the population, maybe we could change the way economy works? The model we are using basically count people as slaves, the output of a slave is a constant, hence in order to sustain economy, we need more slaves. I don't like it at all. I don't think the output is going to be dependent on population, it is going to be dependent on technology. We shouldn't worry about shrinking population at all.

HellDunkel 3y ago
I see the shriking of the population as a symptom. It may cause pain but the root of the problem is the reluctancy to have children. Now this is a bit of a problem because most of us realize the joy of having children a little late or to quote the philosophers „we can choose to do what we want but not what we want to want“. Children change what we want in a good way but when you need two incomes to sustain a family this is a problem.
- powerapple 3y ago
  This should be solved with technology. With technology, economy is no longer an issue, human can be free. But income is not the biggest issue. Poor countries always have higher birthrate not because it is cheap to do so, it is because life is not much besides family, there is not much you can do by yourself. In developed world, you may want to spend a lot time exploring yourself, satisfy your own need, rather than thinking about taking care of a baby.
  - HellDunkel 3y ago
    The shrinking population is not the actual problem. The reluctancy to have children is the real issue. If positive outlook on the future decreases numerous culutral problems will pop up and there will be less creativity to solve them.
    - powerapple 3y ago
      if the shrinking population is not a problem, why reluctancy to have children is an issue? People in developed world are freer than ever, they don't need children.
      - HellDunkel 3y ago
        Just my personal view: reluctancy to have children is also not a problem but rather a symptome, at least in the so-called developed world. The root cause is not having a positive idea of the future leading to reluctancy to work for a better future worth inabiting for future generations.

HellDunkel 3y ago

I see the shriking of the population as a symptom. It may cause pain but the root of the problem is the reluctancy to have children. Now this is a bit of a problem because most of us realize the joy of having children a little late or to quote the philosophers „we can choose to do what we want but not what we want to want“. Children change what we want in a good way but when you need two incomes to sustain a family this is a problem.

powerapple 3y ago
This should be solved with technology. With technology, economy is no longer an issue, human can be free. But income is not the biggest issue. Poor countries always have higher birthrate not because it is cheap to do so, it is because life is not much besides family, there is not much you can do by yourself. In developed world, you may want to spend a lot time exploring yourself, satisfy your own need, rather than thinking about taking care of a baby.
- HellDunkel 3y ago
  The shrinking population is not the actual problem. The reluctancy to have children is the real issue. If positive outlook on the future decreases numerous culutral problems will pop up and there will be less creativity to solve them.
  - powerapple 3y ago
    if the shrinking population is not a problem, why reluctancy to have children is an issue? People in developed world are freer than ever, they don't need children.
    - HellDunkel 3y ago
      Just my personal view: reluctancy to have children is also not a problem but rather a symptome, at least in the so-called developed world. The root cause is not having a positive idea of the future leading to reluctancy to work for a better future worth inabiting for future generations.