4 ms·

I don't agree that an incremental human is a big benefit for The Economy. In a steady state it should be mostly neutral in terms of the per capita GDP (of cours

I don't agree that an incremental human is a big benefit for The Economy. In a steady state it should be mostly neutral in terms of the per capita GDP (of course there are non-linearities with things like scientific discoveries scaling to all of humanity). Even considering taxes an incremental average human should have no impact on the total welfare of society. In a changing demographic pyramid (inverting) I can agree to your point though because the child will be forced to pay an even higher amount towards the wealth distribution towards the care of (child-less) older people. I think the incentives could be fixed in a simple (not easy) way, by not letting childless people benefit from the safety net spanned by children of other people.

justrealist 3y ago
> I think the incentives could be fixed in a simple (not easy) way, by not letting childless people benefit from the safety net spanned by children of other people. Yeah this is the only serious fix, but once childless people become a large % of the electorate (aka it's a real problem), they can vote against assuming responsibility for the problem they created... and your country is basically in an inescapable doom loop.
- munk-a 3y ago
  That'd be an extremely complicated fix though. Are sterile people automatically excluded from old age benefits? What about someone who suffered from assault and finds reproduction traumatic? What about someone who simply finds reproduction repulsive? What about conscientious objectors who think that over population is a serious issue and refuse on moral grounds? What about people with disorders or genetic aberrations that they don't wish to pass on? What about women with physical defects that make pregnancy extremely dangerous? (some heart conditions for instance) That road is extremely grey and has a lot of really difficult edge cases you'll need to sort out. Also - if we just need a next generation in the workforce immigration is an excellent option for the time being.
  - WanderPanda 3y ago
    First of all there is still adoption for many of the points you raise. Secondly, is it justified to risk societal collapse to right these naturally occurring wrongs/unjustnesses? It‘s a hard question especially because we don‘t/can‘t have a sound theory that predicts the future. I believe only society/country scale evolution can figure this out. IMO thats btw. one of the downsides of the EU, eliminating the differences/competition between countries stalling this kind of evolutionary truth seeking process

justrealist 3y ago

> I think the incentives could be fixed in a simple (not easy) way, by not letting childless people benefit from the safety net spanned by children of other people. Yeah this is the only serious fix, but once childless people become a large % of the electorate (aka it's a real problem), they can vote against assuming responsibility for the problem they created... and your country is basically in an inescapable doom loop.

munk-a 3y ago
That'd be an extremely complicated fix though. Are sterile people automatically excluded from old age benefits? What about someone who suffered from assault and finds reproduction traumatic? What about someone who simply finds reproduction repulsive? What about conscientious objectors who think that over population is a serious issue and refuse on moral grounds? What about people with disorders or genetic aberrations that they don't wish to pass on? What about women with physical defects that make pregnancy extremely dangerous? (some heart conditions for instance) That road is extremely grey and has a lot of really difficult edge cases you'll need to sort out. Also - if we just need a next generation in the workforce immigration is an excellent option for the time being.
- WanderPanda 3y ago
  First of all there is still adoption for many of the points you raise. Secondly, is it justified to risk societal collapse to right these naturally occurring wrongs/unjustnesses? It‘s a hard question especially because we don‘t/can‘t have a sound theory that predicts the future. I believe only society/country scale evolution can figure this out. IMO thats btw. one of the downsides of the EU, eliminating the differences/competition between countries stalling this kind of evolutionary truth seeking process