5 ms·

So a lot of problems will be solved by 2049 (overpopulation) and probably many others will arise (we never had worldwide decreasing demographics.)

by pmontra 2mo ago

dotancohen 2mo ago
Overpopulation is not solved. Many African and Middle Eastern cultures continue to have half a dozen children per wife.
- boczez 2mo ago
  I don’t get this, doesn’t proof of an aging global population imply that overpopulation is solving itself? Also is it really that big of an issue? I’ve only heard bill gates talking about it, not sure what it’s got to do with that geezer tbh
  - CodingJeebus 2mo ago
    > is it really that big of an issue? Yes, because the aging population increases healthcare spending to support them while the working age population shrinks, eroding the tax base. This is currently happening in Japan right now.
  - matheusmoreira 2mo ago
    > Also is it really that big of an issue? It's a titanic issue. Old people are expensive. They tax the young to pay for themselves. Now the system is running out of young to tax. And that's the situation in rich and prosperous nations. I live in a developing country that has managed to be relatively poor and have a declining birth rate. It's so absurdly pathological it's not even funny. Symptoms include, for example, increased retirement ages. We will work well into our 70+ years of age, and we will be happy. Newer generations are already coping, they've already internalized the fact they will never actually retire. This is the stuff revolutions are made out of.
  - chermi 2mo ago
    It depends on whether we take care of them at the cost we currently are in the west.
  - missedthecue 2mo ago
    In the same way that a drought solves a flood. Technically yes, but it introduces an equally as dangerous and possibly worse problem.
- palmotea 2mo ago
  > Overpopulation is not solved. Many African and Middle Eastern cultures continue to have a dozen children per wife. It will be (eventually) when the worldwide birth rate drop below replacement. And it's close to that now: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN.
  - littlexsparkee 2mo ago
    Worldwide population keeps growing until ~2080, doesn't sound so urgent to me yet.
- naravara 2mo ago
  There are, like, two countries where TFR is even close to 6. And there’s about 20 where it’s higher than 4. And since those countries also tend to have sky high infant-mortality rates, the global average population growth rate is somewhere like 1-1.2% and dropping fast. Killing USAID probably put a drag on that slowdown by reducing access to family planning resources, but we’ll have to see exactly how much in the coming years.
- dukeyukey 2mo ago
  Not a single country has a fertility rate of 6 children per woman. And the highest middle eastern country is Yemen at 4.3. The next highest is Iraq at 3.1.
  - dotancohen 2mo ago
    I just looked up recent numbers. - Niger: 6.7 births per woman - Somalia: 6.0 - Chad: 5.5 So it seems only Africa.
- roysting 2mo ago
  [dead]
mostertoaster 2mo ago
Overpopulation is not a problem. Maybe in a couple countries. But not for the world, and not for the west and definitely not for America. As the population has grown poverty has decreased.
- deeviant 2mo ago
  It's a huge problem, it's just not a problem to economic model, but the ecological one.
  - KPGv2 2mo ago
    It's a problem to the economic model, too, but of course no one cares about more than a couple fiscal quarters in the future. The looming ecological disasters will irreversibly destroy the global economy in some of our lifetimes if nothing happens to stop it pretty soon.
    - matchbok3 2mo ago
      People have been saying the climate is going to fall apart and kill us all for the past 30 years. It's time for a new approach.
      - KPGv2 2mo ago
        Are you...ignorant of how many of the refugee crises are because of climate change? Like literally right now? In 2024 alone, about 40M people were displaced due to climate change, and that's a doubling from ten years ago.
- throw-the-towel 2mo ago
  It is a problem, because all these people want a good standard of living which strains the environment.
  - jppittma 2mo ago
    Each marginal person produces more than they consume. As a whole, everyone is better off for having more people.
bryanlarsen 2mo ago
Population is not the primary problem. Some people have a massive ecological footprint. For instance, somebody who uses a private jet ~daily. Other people have a negative ecological footprint: their actions either actively improve the ecology of the world or act to reduce the ecological footprint of others. The difference between the two is many orders of magnitude. A world-wide population of 100 million daily private jet users likely has a larger ecological impact than 10 billion low-impact humans. Population change takes decades or centuries for the ecological impact to happen. Shifts in the ecological footprint of significant populations can cause shifts over a small number of years.

So a lot of problems will be solved by 2049 (overpopulation) and probably many others will arise (we never had worldwide decreasing demographics.)

by pmontra 2mo ago

So a lot of problems will be solved by 2049 (overpopulation) and probably many others will arise (we never had worldwide decreasing demographics.)

dotancohen 2mo ago

Overpopulation is not solved. Many African and Middle Eastern cultures continue to have half a dozen children per wife.

boczez 2mo ago
I don’t get this, doesn’t proof of an aging global population imply that overpopulation is solving itself? Also is it really that big of an issue? I’ve only heard bill gates talking about it, not sure what it’s got to do with that geezer tbh
- CodingJeebus 2mo ago
  > is it really that big of an issue? Yes, because the aging population increases healthcare spending to support them while the working age population shrinks, eroding the tax base. This is currently happening in Japan right now.
- matheusmoreira 2mo ago
  > Also is it really that big of an issue? It's a titanic issue. Old people are expensive. They tax the young to pay for themselves. Now the system is running out of young to tax. And that's the situation in rich and prosperous nations. I live in a developing country that has managed to be relatively poor and have a declining birth rate. It's so absurdly pathological it's not even funny. Symptoms include, for example, increased retirement ages. We will work well into our 70+ years of age, and we will be happy. Newer generations are already coping, they've already internalized the fact they will never actually retire. This is the stuff revolutions are made out of.
- chermi 2mo ago
  It depends on whether we take care of them at the cost we currently are in the west.
- missedthecue 2mo ago
  In the same way that a drought solves a flood. Technically yes, but it introduces an equally as dangerous and possibly worse problem.
palmotea 2mo ago
> Overpopulation is not solved. Many African and Middle Eastern cultures continue to have a dozen children per wife. It will be (eventually) when the worldwide birth rate drop below replacement. And it's close to that now: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN.
- littlexsparkee 2mo ago
  Worldwide population keeps growing until ~2080, doesn't sound so urgent to me yet.
naravara 2mo ago
There are, like, two countries where TFR is even close to 6. And there’s about 20 where it’s higher than 4. And since those countries also tend to have sky high infant-mortality rates, the global average population growth rate is somewhere like 1-1.2% and dropping fast. Killing USAID probably put a drag on that slowdown by reducing access to family planning resources, but we’ll have to see exactly how much in the coming years.
dukeyukey 2mo ago
Not a single country has a fertility rate of 6 children per woman. And the highest middle eastern country is Yemen at 4.3. The next highest is Iraq at 3.1.
- dotancohen 2mo ago
  I just looked up recent numbers. - Niger: 6.7 births per woman - Somalia: 6.0 - Chad: 5.5 So it seems only Africa.
roysting 2mo ago
[dead]

mostertoaster 2mo ago

Overpopulation is not a problem. Maybe in a couple countries. But not for the world, and not for the west and definitely not for America. As the population has grown poverty has decreased.

deeviant 2mo ago
It's a huge problem, it's just not a problem to economic model, but the ecological one.
- KPGv2 2mo ago
  It's a problem to the economic model, too, but of course no one cares about more than a couple fiscal quarters in the future. The looming ecological disasters will irreversibly destroy the global economy in some of our lifetimes if nothing happens to stop it pretty soon.
  - matchbok3 2mo ago
    People have been saying the climate is going to fall apart and kill us all for the past 30 years. It's time for a new approach.
    - KPGv2 2mo ago
      Are you...ignorant of how many of the refugee crises are because of climate change? Like literally right now? In 2024 alone, about 40M people were displaced due to climate change, and that's a doubling from ten years ago.
throw-the-towel 2mo ago
It is a problem, because all these people want a good standard of living which strains the environment.
- jppittma 2mo ago
  Each marginal person produces more than they consume. As a whole, everyone is better off for having more people.

bryanlarsen 2mo ago

Population is not the primary problem. Some people have a massive ecological footprint. For instance, somebody who uses a private jet ~daily. Other people have a negative ecological footprint: their actions either actively improve the ecology of the world or act to reduce the ecological footprint of others. The difference between the two is many orders of magnitude. A world-wide population of 100 million daily private jet users likely has a larger ecological impact than 10 billion low-impact humans. Population change takes decades or centuries for the ecological impact to happen. Shifts in the ecological footprint of significant populations can cause shifts over a small number of years.