Preferences

amanaplanacanal parent
Like almost all environmental problems, nobody wants to talk about the real root of the problem: people have been having too damn many babies.

kmeisthax
No, it isn't. In fact, the entire developed world, plus Russia and China, is facing significant demographic cliffs in the near future because people stopped having too many damned babies decades ago. Human population will peak at 10B and start declining from there. In fact, several countries are trying to restart excess-replacement fertility specifically because the decline in working-age population is already too steep and the alternative is to starve the elderly to death[0].

The real root of the problem is that there is no root of the problem. There are hundreds of causes that all feed back into one another. If you try to boil this down into a root-cause narrative, what you will inevitably end up with is a cartoon caricature that, at best, pushes an anti-human narrative; and worse / more likely, blames some proxy for the poor, racial minorities, or foreigners. I know this because the whole 'population bomb' thing wound up being used by fascists to try and paint their shenanigans as environmentally friendly.

[0] In Russia, this is literally the only thing that will get Putin chucked out a window. A very large chunk of the country moved to mining towns in the 70s and 80s to take advantage of the Soviet Union equivalent of FIRE[1]. Those pensions are a crushing burden upon the government and any attempt to reduce them causes massive protests and riots.

[1] Financial Independence, Retire Early

biorach
> A very large chunk of the country moved to mining towns in the 70s and 80s to take advantage of the Soviet Union equivalent of FIRE[1]. Those pensions are a crushing burden upon the government

Sources? In particular, what proportion of the population?

When were the attempts to reduce the pensions?

kmeisthax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-1n-05Xu6Y

This video has it's own sources list linked in the description: https://pastebin.com/AbaJ8EW1

To summarize: in Soviet Russia you got early retirement if you worked in mining, or moved to certain smaller towns. A lot of people in Russia maximized their early retirement by doing this. Then the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia went through Hard Times. Their fertility rate fell off a cliff and never recovered. While other countries also had falling fertility rates, they also have lots of immigration to offset that, but nobody wants to move to Russia. So imagine America, but with no millenials, no immigrants, twice as many boomers, and they all only care about keeping Medicare functional for exclusively themselves.

One of Putin's first acts was to attempt pension reform, because it's the $3600 spent on candles[0] in the Russian budget. This led to massive protests, so he backed down. He tried again around the time COVID started, and again, massive protests. It's the one thing that reliably causes Putin's popularity numbers to fall. Not even an unpopular invasion will do that. Because, for a large proportion of older Russians, the government exists solely as the medium by which treasure is pilfered from the rest of the world and into their pocket.

I don't remember the exact proportion of Russian pensioners to the rest of the population, I just remember that it's unusually dire.

[0] https://twitter.com/dril/status/384408932061417472

remexre
I thought the root cause isn't the total number of people, it's the fact that developed-nation lifestyles are a lot more environmentally impactful than developing ones; (6B * current developed-nation avg carbon footprint) > (8B * current global avg carbon footprint)
concordDance
They're both causes. E.g. if there were only 500 million people in the world there'd be no issue. Similarly, if everyone lived a somali lifestyle it wouldn't be that bad environmentally.
comte7092
Population growth is peaking and will begin to decline within the lifetimes of people being born today.

Your point is a red herring.

vixen99
Actually lots of people are now talking about the problem of too few babies especially in Europe. Many countries are looking to their populations halving by 2100. A recent report says there are 79 countries with fertility rates (mean=1.59) below the replacement level rate (mean=2.08).

[ The means are my calculations on dataset in https://www.pop.org/simple/countries-with-below-replacement-... ]

There are some negative consequences or at least difficult questions to wrestle with. Where is the tax coming from in a massively aged world? Who pays for healthcare for the elderly and who looks after them? Will retirement remain an option in those countries and will those folk get a pension? Others can comment on the positive aspects of declining fertility.

goodpoint
By large part most of the problem is due to overconsumption from a minority of the world population.

But I don't blame most individuals: people buy what's available in shops and have little choice to do otherwise. The problem is in the economical system.

How many is just right?
DrThunder
Absolutely not. This a massive lie propped up by nihilistic ant-humanist rhetoric.

The population is going down. People aren't having enough babies for replacement. You're going to have a rude awakening when you get old and there's not enough people to take care of you, pay into the retirement system etc.

This item has no comments currently.