Robots will take care of us. Meanwhile we’ll be begging for death and they will keep us alive -_-
look at the bright side, in about 10 years, housing will become affordable again
they’re hiring caregivers like crazy in my state
Unionizing opportunity.
Ha, and then they will continue to pay them shit and then fire everyone. The us is not union compatible with current us labour laws.
I mean they should still do it, but paying jobs are thin enough that there will always be scabs.
Only if there was a way to sustainably provide for an older population would that be not concerning. Otherwise, it’s gonna turn convervative af everywhere pretty soon.
Karma for them being dicks.
Infinite growth of human population would hit a hard ceiling on earth resources real soon.
People not having babies is a good thing.
Right on. The way the way population is right now, every time a chunk of mountain or glacier falls down, or a river floods, tens of thousands die or are displaced.
In 1960 there were 2-3 billion people on the planet. Now it’s 3x as many cars, mouths to feed, homes to heat/cool.
In Bangladesh there are over 1 million Rohingan refugees who’ve been there for TEN YEARS. They can’t work there, have no country to move to, have to live on $6-12 a month for food.
The 1st 40years of my life i was told I had to worry about over population, in the last 5 I’ve been told I now need to worry about “demographic collapse”
I agree. I chose not to have kids for various reasons. And my “skilled” lol trade skills will die with me.
It’s not about infinite growth.
Given that not everyone lives to old age, we would expect children to outnumber old people even in a zero (or slightly negative) percent growth scenario.
Those juniors are good for nothing either way! oh, wait…
Sounds like a situation that will self correct in a few decades, no?
Technically, probably yes, one way or another…
People think we need to keep growing the population. We’re stuck on a single planet together. If we could live on the moon or Mars it would be a different story, but I think it’s perfectly fine to decrease the population size back to 1980s levels, at least.
And we’re talking about the elderly who don’t add any productivity to the planet too.
Sure, some minority of boomers have a good attitude and want to work for the planet and the future generations, but the reality is that a majority of them have piss poor values and are now a net drain on society.
Plenty of people in other age groups that are also a net drain on society. We won’t get far if we don’t see it as the class issue that it mostly is.
Ua the issue isnt age groups but the distribution of resources and access to political power of different classes.
An 89 year old member of their local community centre will always be more useful to the humanity , and evem the planet , than a 29 year old billionaire lol
People live longer every decade and the definition of Senior Citizen doesn’t change. This would not be a bad fact on its own…but declining birth rates can cause many issues.
Not really, unless Gen Z starts having a fuckload of babies soon. Because each generation will be progressively smaller if the fertility rates don’t rise.
It’s not a huge issue in the third world where your kids are your retirement plan anyway so they have a ton more children. In the developed world, we have pension systems and stuff so on an individual level, having kids is likely bad for you financially, you want other people to have kids so you don’t have to spend a bunch of money raising them, but their taxes pay for your retirement.
Just funnel money from billionaires into it and problem solved. We can keep the aame money in circulation, half the population, and be fine. I see no issue with lowering birth rates, and wvery issue with a lack of policy changes surrounding it
Unless there’s some horrible disaster in the coming decades that will kill billions and harm wealthy old people less.
I don’t see a problem.
-Satan
would it be better if the population was growing past 9bn?
There’s a stable population the ecosystem can support and I’m pretty sure 9bn is too fuckin many.
not that I’m volunteering to free up space tho… there’s a whole lot of techbro chuds who think there’s way too many people, but their motivations are pretty genocidal tbh.
honestly we’re fucked in either direction, but I suspect there’s a lot of reasons the population total will go down once the climate crisis starts shifting millions of people around.
yes growth would be better for me so there are more young people to support the old people
I don’t have enough to give so much to old people
selfish prick wants the population to grow so he has more servants at the nursing home
more young people to support the old people
But human labor is incredibly efficienct in the modern day. You don’t need ten young people for every one old person - nine of whom die by their mid-30s - so that everyone doesn’t starve.
But the role of elderly people has changed so much in the last century. On a national scale, they’re no longer master craftsmen or child caregivers or elder advisors. They’re just the base of the consumer economy and the electoral pool.
As democracy fails and the economy becomes more fixated on tech capital than quality of life, they’re marked out as increasingly expendable.
It isn’t that we need more young people so much as we’ve alienated and de-skilled our old people.
Just waiting for Jesus?
In a pretty abstract sense, yes, and it gives me peace.
I don’t think youth outnumber old are sign of good thing either, but you do you.
Even at constant population or even mildly declining, you would expect the young to outnumber the old by a bit. Given people die on the way to getting old and die whole being old more than the young die.
They may be even fewer than when the currently old folks when they were young but still be expected to outnumber the old
you would expect the young to outnumber the old
Kinda depends on how you define the two cohorts.
We’re also overlooking a seminal moment in history where
- Vaccinations
- Nitrogen rich fertilizer
- Fossil fuels
- A sixty year long people of relative global peace
All came online at about the same time, radically improving human life expectancy over two generations.
As a point of comparison, the county of Tibet had an average life expectancy of 35 in the 1920s and 72 in the 2020s.
Ooooh I saw a video about what the government of China did in Tibet in the 1940s.
Im not saying that the Chinese people are heroes or paragons nowadays or anything like that but I was shocked .
Why would anyone make a kid is beyond me. More mear for future wars, for warehouses and factories, forcing a life into being just for suffering and misery
People live longer. 100 years ago 50 year old man was old.
Yes people live a little longer. but the main average that skews average life expectancy/longevity numbers is today fewer babies and mothers die during and post birth.
It’ll be fine. The baby boom our grandparents cane from was an anomaly
The US baby boom is not really meaningful on a global scale
Sure, but only the inner lips of the labia matter
Minora supremacist
Nice vagina
Baby boomers also had more kids than the generation that preceded them. So did Gen X. Millennials are the first to fail to even replace their own population.
They’re slow off the mark, averaging 27-28 for the first child rather than 22.
I am so glad I didn’t knock up who I thought I was forever with in my 20s or 30s. I would be even more miserable now and would have miserable people depending on me.
How to say you don’t understand sustainability without saying you don’t understand it. :-)
