this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
253 points (98.5% liked)

World News

34956 readers
466 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Graphy@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (15 children)

Is less people really such a bad thing? We’re at a point where everyone’s already complaining about housing and climate change.

We can blame the 1% and we can say the elderly will suffer but something’s gotta give. I feel we’re all buying into a pyramid scheme.

[–] ahnesampo@sopuli.xyz 28 points 2 years ago (12 children)

It’s not fewer people that’s the problem, but fewer people too fast. A society needs labor to provide the goods and services people need. If the share of people who do labor (working age) to people who don’t (children and the elderly) becomes too lopsided, the burden on those who work becomes unsustainable. (The Boomers had the opposite: they had a smaller older generation and didn’t have many children, so during their prime years the working age population was much larger than dependants on both ends of the age pyramid. That’s part of the reason why they were so prosperous.)

Going by total fertility rate (children per woman):

  • 2.1 is enough for replacement. No problems.
  • 1.8 means every generation is 10 % smaller than the previous. We can deal with that.
  • 1.5 means every generation is 25 % smaller than the previous. This starts to cause problems.
  • 1.0 means generation size halves every generation. This is not sustainable.
  • 0.8 RIP South Korea
[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago

I think that’s slippery slope or presumptive, at best. Birth rates shift and flow and there will always be people that have kids.

I have more respect for people that see the trend and don’t want to create wage slaves.

If governments addressed real issues instead of maximizing corporate interests, they might create a stable birth rate.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)