• PlasmaDistortion
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 years ago

    Sorry but this is a good thing. Earths population is too large for the resources available.

    • @ChrisLicht@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      My instinct is that you’re right, but I wonder if what we’re really saying is that earth’s population is too large under the currently dominant socioeconomic and lifestyle constructs.

      • In the end, that’s more or less the same thing. But the question is, do we need more people? It’s also easier to be sustainable if we require less.

      • @Skyline969@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        02 years ago

        I mean, yes but also no. There’s just way too many people, period. Merely 60 years ago the human population was sitting around 3 billion people. Now it’s 8. Earth’s resources are finite, and at this rate of growth I would not be surprised if we ran out of non-renewables (with no renewable alternatives that scale as well as non-renewables) in our lifetime or our children’s.

  • Izzgo
    link
    fedilink
    22 years ago

    Of course this is a good thing, but there are still serious negative consequences to a reducing population, which must be mitigated. Primarily, old people who are past working age are an expensive population to maintain. When there are as many or more old people as there are young, the burden is too heavy for young people to bear. And I say this as a 70 year old. Young people today CANNOT hit old age without their own substantial retirement resources.

    • @merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      But, maybe the idea that the young should support the old in their retirement is bad idea.

      Why shouldn’t it be someone’s responsibility to finance their own retirement? Why should it be expected that the younger generation supports the old?

      It has always seemed insane to me that I’m expected to fund the retirement of people 25+ years older, and I’m counting on people 25+ years younger to take care of me. Of course purely individual retirement planning only works for the rich and the lucky. But, you pay into a pot that helps with retirement costs, they should be the retirement costs of people roughly your age.

      If a generation is funding its own retirement, then it doesn’t matter if people are having fewer kids. In fact, if they have fewer kids they’ll have more money left over to put into the pot for their own retirement.

  • @jmp242@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    I am not an expert, but it seems like most developed countries are learning to deal with a shrinking population. The current decline hasn’t had effects like loosening up the job market, so it seems to me this means it’s not currently causing any problems that would be catastrophic. There’s clearly enough workers for the work that needs to get done.

    I think there’s not yet been a article of all the ‘doom and gloom’ of population decline that actually explains why it’s worse than overpopulation.

    • @momocchi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      Because the problems come years after the birthrate decline when a large portion of your population is retired and you don’t have enough young workers to fill the roles they typically fill

      • @variants@possumpat.io
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        It’s going to be tough but it needs to happen eventually, plus now we have ai which should help alleviate some of that once it really gets going

      • @Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        02 years ago

        and you don’t have enough young workers to fill the roles they typically fill

        This is a myth. Immigration guarantees that you’ll ALWAYS have workers to fill whatever roles you need filled.

    • @tintory@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      Except we need really tight labor shortages to jack up wages and house prices to go down

    • @merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      02 years ago

      most developed countries are learning to deal with a shrinking population

      Not really, most countries are dealing with it by increasing immigration. That’s clearly not a sustainable long-term plan.

  • @Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    02 years ago

    Yay for Korea! A constantly growing population is not sustainable.

    This isn’t a Children of Men scenario, so there’s no need to fear intentional low birthrates.

    • @tintory@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      02 years ago

      Except

      1. Young Koreans aren’t getting better jobs
      2. Housing isn’t slowing down fast enough
      3. Yoon and South Korean Government are trying to raise working hours

      Koreans are having a low birth rate because they are destroying their youth

      • @Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        Those points seem to all be a result of rapid growth, which will (eventually) have to correct itself.

        The only people who should worry about low birth rates are corporations who know that won’t be selling their garbage to as many people as they forecasted for shareholders. 😁