Nope. Americans should be having more kids on average, not less.https://twitter.com/kaichoyce/status/1305776845053280257 …
Show this thread
-
Sad I had already stated there is much we could do to deal with poverty here before we start adding more people to the problem. Given resources a finite any system which requires continual growth of the population is doomed to fail in the long run
The carrying capacity of the earth is contingent on the development and spread of technology. As the population has exploded, the *absolute number* of people living in extreme poverty has actually declined —significantly!pic.twitter.com/SigzIxjMtb
-
-
I don't think I argued anywhere technology wasn't helpful or poverty wasn't getting better, but what isn't clear is why does it require continued population growth over sustainability. Given finite resources and AGW, exponential population growth doesn't seem the answer.
-
If finite resources were the bottleneck, you would not see fewer people living in abject poverty after going from 1 billion to 7 billion. If agricultural productivity had stagnated, you would have. But more humans = more ideas, and more hands carrying them to fruition.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.