This was interesting and thought-provoking, but has a sort of strawman quality to it to me, or obfuscates a debate in a way that seems unproductive. I might eve

This was interesting and thought-provoking, but has a sort of strawman quality to it to me, or obfuscates a debate in a way that seems unproductive. I might even go so far as to say it seems like it's arguing in bad faith, but I'm not sure I entirely believe that. It seems to conflate different forms of degrowth, and assumes whatever is happening in the UK recently is the same sort of thing that's always being discussed when degrowth is discussed. Increasing trade barriers and regulation while holding population constant might result in economic degrowth, but it doesn't necessarily track population degrowth in a healthy or productive way. I do think that it's interesting to think about some of the questions being raised, but the arguments seem to do a disservice to rigorous discussion of degrowth and the development of solutions to population dilemmas.