Continuing to increase the world population is absolutely nuts.

*I’m not interested in gradual natural declines from whatever factors. 2 max implemented now.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2010 months ago

      The problem has never been the amount of resources. The problem is distribution of resources is heavily skewed to a few.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        510 months ago

        If the abundant resources are obtained through unbridled agriculture (deforestation) and excessive amounts of ecosystem-destroying pesticides, maybe they’re not sustainable

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      I mean, bias is a problem, but there’s an even bigger issue. What happens if a couple has a third child? It may not seem like it, but this is a major problem.

      • Pandantic [they/them]
        link
        fedilink
        410 months ago

        Yes, putting this into law would either require the government to pay for mandatory abortions or mandatory sterilization after the second child.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          310 months ago

          Or some serious financial repercussions. Maybe extra tax that goes towards more support for people with fewer children (or their children).

            • Pandantic [they/them]
              link
              fedilink
              3
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Yeah, the system would have to be changed by miles for this to apply evenly among classes, and by extension, races. Some assurance of equal levels of education, resources, and access to medical care to take care of all roadblocks to having exactly the amount of children you want to have. Edit: and that would mean free (as in uninhibited financially or by laws) access to abortion regardless of situation.

    • BarqsHasBiteOP
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      Not having kids works on an individual level, but without worldwide implementation/cooperation we just continue on and on growing the population. Thus this post.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        110 months ago

        No, there aren’t too many kids, there are too many of us older people. The fertility rate has already dropped, the unpopular opinion that would be effective would be don’t let people live past 65 or something like that. If you cut fertility so low, it just makes the population skew even older than it already is. Better to get the average below replacement (it is headed there soon without your mandate) and then hopefully to replacement level at a better population size.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      And yet the population graph is curving toward a plateau and new generations are so much smaller than previous that many places are more in danger of a rapid drop in population (in a few decades, assuming nothing changes). This is a solved problem: our best bet is to rucsh the developing world toward development