• demlet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    5 days ago

    I mean, we are overpopulated, but the solution is just to have fewer kids. Yeah, us older folks will suffer the consequences of less young people to care for us in our old age, but after that’s over, things could be pretty nice for the planet.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I mean, we are overpopulated

      No. The problem ISN’T that there’s too many people. The problem is that rich people and rich countries are hogging almost all the resources so there’s not enough to go around.

      You’re doing exactly what the meme is warning against.

      the solution is just to have fewer kids

      While that’s probably a good idea for most on the micro (specific family) scale, on a macro (country, continent, planet) scale, it does almost nothing compared to better resource distribution.

      us older folks will suffer the consequences of less young people to care for us in our old age

      That’s ALSO more of a distribution problem: with better compensation and working conditions, more people of all ages who are themselves healthy enough to do the job would care for seniors professionally, and with better social service budgets, more seniors would be able to afford it.

      Moreover, people in other professions having fewer working hours and better pay per hour would allow them the time and economic breathing room to better care for their family members in their free time, which would mean fewer offspring per family would be needed for it

      but after that’s over, things could be pretty nice for the planet.

      No. The resource hogging rich people would still be poisoning everything by perpetuating reliance on fossil fuels and other genocidal economic behaviors.

      Every single problem attributed to overpopulation can be solved by distributing resources away from corporations and billionaires towards things that actually improve the well-being of humans in general AND the planet.

      Pretending otherwise is helping the oppressive elite whether you intend to or not.

      • demlet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        I mean, you could probably fit four families in my apartment, but does anyone want to live that way? It’s not a question of how many people the planet can hold, it’s a question of how many people would be comfortable for it to hold. And that’s not even getting into the fact that other creatures have a right to be here also.

        • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          you could probably fit four families in my apartment,

          So you’re quite comfortable, right? Just saying how you feel about the poors? jfc.

          that’s not even getting into the fact that other creatures have a right to be here also.

          Yes, veganism makes the planet vastly more sustainable. We’re nowhere near the limits…

          Unless you need hamburgers to be comfortable? In that case we should castrate the poor. \s

          • demlet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            No, I live in a pretty small place. My point is that we could probably find all kinds of ways to cram way more people on the planet. But would we want to? Is that really the world anyone wants to live in?

          • demlet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            4 days ago

            The fact that I don’t speak any other languages doesn’t imply that I’m only referring to English speakers. That’s a ridiculous argument.

            And I don’t advocate that people stop procreating. I don’t actually advocate anything, but I don’t personally think it would be a net harm if the entire population of the world chose to have less children for a generation or two.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 days ago

    I don’t understand how, logically, overpopulation is related to immigration. It’s the same number of people, just in different places.

    • HostilePasta@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      The only way I can see that making any sense is if it’s immigration into a very resource-poor area. Maybe a desert or tundra? I guess Las Vegas comes to mind, it’s overpopulated for what is naturally found there. Areas like the Sahara desert especially.

      Other than that kind of very specific circumstance, definitely racist.

  • cub Gucci@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 days ago

    The ecology has value insofar it provides humanity with resources to live. When you fall for ecofascism you necessarily exclude someone from humanity. Please don’t do it.

    • seathru@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      I’m OK with excluding billionaires from humanity. I am not a perfect person.

      • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        I like the fire but I don’t think it’s a good precedent to exclude bad people from humanity, more accurately from basic human decency. IMO that does NOT mean that the billionaires don’t get the wall, they ought to get the wall at a bare minimum as self-defense against their ongoing violence against the working class, but they should only get the wall and nothing worse than what is needed (e.g. torture).