mhornberger t1_j7rvw8m wrote on February 8, 2023 at 11:34 PM

Reply to comment by Consensuseur in What's your estimation for the minimum size of global population required for preserving modern civilization with advanced technology and medicine, and even progressing further? by Evgeneey

I suspect sub-replacement and in some cases still-declining fertility rates are a more likely issue. Though I think it'll be a long time before that poses any threat of societal collapse. Even assuming we don't incrementally get closer to a post-scarcity economy.

https://ourworldindata.org/fertility-rate#what-explains-the-change-in-the-number-of-children-women-have

Consensuseur t1_j7t17bp wrote on February 9, 2023 at 4:47 AM

I think this is right. I wish our economy was scored more on improvements in efficiency and less on limitless growth. Lower growth and consumption rates are at odds with our indexes of what we call economic health. How to untangle these things?

mhornberger t1_j7t1jvc wrote on February 9, 2023 at 4:50 AM

I don't know what "limitless growth" means, honestly. Growth in what? You can have economic growth with a plateaued or even declining population. We were never going to have infinite people, infinite energy use, infinite land use, infinite food consumption, whatever.

I don't think people are going to embrace austerity voluntarily. Emissions are already declining in many rich countries, anyway. India, China etc remaining poor was never going to be our plan. Nor are Americans or Europeans going to want to live like a poor person in India in 1980. People like wealth. Comfort, convenience, status goods, travel, a varied diet, etc.

Consensuseur t1_j7t2a6b wrote on February 9, 2023 at 4:57 AM

Well, hopefully our population can plateau and our consumption can be achieved with less consequence sooner rather than later.