"And yet, there are good reasons for thinking that precisely the opposite is true: the more people there are, the more solutions to problems will be found." Af

"And yet, there are good reasons for thinking that precisely the opposite is true: the more people there are, the more solutions to problems will be found." After that quote he then proceeds to show how people that pointed to graphs with ever increasing populations were wrong. He then follows up by pointing at a graph that shows ever decreasing crop land use per capita making the same extrapolation error that the population explosion people made. He then ignores the elephant in the room. This is not just a question of can we sustain population at X but also can we sustain a quality of life that is desirable at X. One of the reasons fertility drops (IMO) is that we currently cannot. It is not clear to me nuclear power etc is going to change that. Regardless he offers no proof that it would other than simple optimism. I agree it would help us to sustain a larger population but is it desirable? Now that you have mentioned Japan and Korea I suggest you might consider what your thinking might be about kids if the only option you could afford was this - (not knocking Japan or Korean - at least it keeps their homelessness in check): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4oQDnHlrR0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4oQDnHlrR0 I can appreciate your process for deciding to and raising kids (whatever works is good). Mine was totally different and resulted in having him late in life (which has its own pluses and minuses). I have actually done something similar. I tell my son raising him is the most important thing I ever did. That is because it actually is/was the best part of my life and I have been fortunate enough to do many other exciting things that still do not compete. I would like his future to have the same opportunities.