you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Idgaf about replacement rate. I don't want the old to be replaced. I want the economy to get smaller and for the wealth to be better distributed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Smaller economy is fine, I guess -- tho deflation has certainly caused problems in the past. Better distributed wealth is a shared goal. Depopulation, and other forms of Degrowth, are largely driven by eugenicist ideas and are neither necessary nor desirable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW8vkUY93i8

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (4 children)

    You might notice I never once promoted any such depopulation ideas, simply that the natural negative growth trend as a result of highly educated populations is a good thing that we should not take any action against.

    We need less people, we don't need to make the number of people less: it happens on its own.

    If it were possible to make a nondiscrimatory policy against growth then that would be great, but we already saw attempts fail in places like China which resulted in skewed demographics. In 1994 in Cairo the UN met and decided the best answer was simply: Educate Women.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    We need less people

    No we don't. And, S. Korea in particular will need more people than they have available, soon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    They don't NEED more people, nowhere on earth NEEDS more people, as long as you have as few as 12 genetically distinct individuals then life will continue, and even if they did NEED people then theres lots of people all over the world who would love to migrate to SK.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Global warming is independent of population, emissions can be controlled without population controls.

    Yes, they do need more people, and immigration is a possible "solve", but right now they aren't getting the immigration necessary -- tho largely due to their own policies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Global Warming is NOT independent of population.

    The population growth almost perfectly aligns with climate change, and the top polluters on the planet are China despite having one of the lowest pollution per capita ratios.

    More humans = more environmental destruction

  • source
  • parent