5 ms·

Short answer: yes. This is an amusing question, but there is no problem. The "growing population" statement is misleading, anyway, because it is temporary. The

Short answer: yes. This is an amusing question, but there is no problem. The "growing population" statement is misleading, anyway, because it is temporary. The fertility rate is plummeting. About 2/3 of countries are already below replacement rate, many far below, and countries are already worried about the demographic shock from dranatically decreasing populations: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/worlds-plummeting-fertility-rate/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/worlds-plummeting-fertility... The demographic collapse isn't currently as obvious only because it takes a long time for people to die :-). The bigger worry is dramatically decreasing population sizes over the next few centuries.

pjc50 3y ago
That will reverse once people feel less overpopulated and systems to properly compensate women for going into labour are developed.
- QuarterReptile 3y ago
  yikes
- 221qqwe 3y ago
  Or cloning vats are invented...
- moonchrome 3y ago
  > and systems to properly compensate women for going into labour are developed. I don't see the correlation in developed countries. I'd say by the time most women consider children (30s) they are past their biological prime (>30 used to be considered geriatric pregnancy). Our entire social values would need to change to reverse that trend - career, education, values. Even if they invented a way to bypass pregnancy completely the commitment of raising multiple children is incompatible with modern values.
- quantified 3y ago
  Lengthening generations is a way for everyone who wants children to have them and still slow or remove the rate of growth. It would mean reducing/eliminating living great-grandparent/child relations, and make grandparents elderly rather than simply in their 50s.