• TachyonTele@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t know. Do we really need to replace another 8.2 billion people, does that line really need to go up?

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, but we also don’t want that line to suddenly plummet either.

      Think of it this way: birth rate of one is half replacement value and most developed countries are there. We’re already having half the children we need to stay level but it’s not obvious because of the larger generations still living. In 20 years, that half population will half yet again, one quarter the children to level off. Then those older generations age out, and you get larger generations replaced by multiple halvings. For example if you live three generations, then at the end of your life, the population is only 1/8 what it was. Obviously it won’t be this simple and many things could affect birthrate but I find this trend frightening for humanity’s future. We’re not talking lower population but facing the possibility of a crashing population

      • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The birthrate BS is already being used as reasons for controlling women. The only down fall is Religious nut bags and Republican assholes losing control over the other sex.

        A better way of life automatically equals the natural number of children. There’s no need for another 9 billion people. There is a very strong need of a better life for 8 billion of us.