3 ms·
I strongly disagree, while technology clearly helped us growing, there are always tradeoffs, even agriculture is not ideal. We can solve some problems but it is
by stephc_int13 3y ago
I strongly disagree, while technology clearly helped us growing, there are always tradeoffs, even agriculture is not ideal. We can solve some problems but it is almost never « for free » and the cost is newer problems to solve. I think there is a compounding effect with population growth, and I don’t think that population can grow forever on a single planet, that is nonsense.
How much is enough? My intuition is that population stability is more important than actual number, but between 2 Billions and 10Billions is likely the sweet spot.
- alexey-salmin 3y agoYou just looked at the current number, arbitrarily added some margin on both sides and assumed it's the "sweet spot". Congratulations, you're at the same level of thinking as 17th, 18th and 19th centuries philosophers.
- collyw 3y agoI was thinking along those lines. No reason given for the number, pretty much pulled it out of thin air. When I was growing up we were told we would have too much population and wouldn't be able to feed ourselves. Now obesity seems like a bigger problem. Obviously infinite growth isn't possible, but where the actual number lies, I honestly have no idea.