I know this sounds kinda under-complex, but I think it still summarizes the essence of what I think is true: capitalism or kids. Either, or. Both won‘t work in the long term.
The question is, what then? We‘ve had indigenous, subsistence-based cultures, we‘ve had mercantilistic ones, we‘ve had communism. None was able to bring some decent prosperity and dignity to more than a few. So, what then? I‘m in favor of experimenting locally, cancelling regulations to do so, evaluate what works, then apply on other places. Sooner rather than later. For being prepared.
No, no, no. Earth's resources are finite. Even our own created resources like housing are also limited (for a variety of reasons). We have only - to use Jospeh Campbell's words - this one 'spaceship' - Earth - to house and support us all. We can't continue increasing our global population because the planet cannot support a consistent increase. All environmental science confirms this. It seems very clear that a declining population is environmentally - for nature, and thus for humans dependant on nature - a good thing!
I agree- It isn’t the population that needs to be maintained, it’s a level of technology and scientific knowledge that would be useful. A dramatically decreased population might be bad for capitalism, but if resources are redirected towards health care, education and sustainable food production, and real care for other species, our descendants will be far better off.
The bee population dying out is a far bigger threat for everyone.
I know this sounds kinda under-complex, but I think it still summarizes the essence of what I think is true: capitalism or kids. Either, or. Both won‘t work in the long term.
The question is, what then? We‘ve had indigenous, subsistence-based cultures, we‘ve had mercantilistic ones, we‘ve had communism. None was able to bring some decent prosperity and dignity to more than a few. So, what then? I‘m in favor of experimenting locally, cancelling regulations to do so, evaluate what works, then apply on other places. Sooner rather than later. For being prepared.
No, no, no. Earth's resources are finite. Even our own created resources like housing are also limited (for a variety of reasons). We have only - to use Jospeh Campbell's words - this one 'spaceship' - Earth - to house and support us all. We can't continue increasing our global population because the planet cannot support a consistent increase. All environmental science confirms this. It seems very clear that a declining population is environmentally - for nature, and thus for humans dependant on nature - a good thing!
I agree- It isn’t the population that needs to be maintained, it’s a level of technology and scientific knowledge that would be useful. A dramatically decreased population might be bad for capitalism, but if resources are redirected towards health care, education and sustainable food production, and real care for other species, our descendants will be far better off.
The bee population dying out is a far bigger threat for everyone.
Oops, Katy. 🤦♂️
How awesome to get a book recommendation from Katie Milkman! 💙🤓