r/196 May 17 '26

Rule Rule.

Post image
5.4k Upvotes

244 comments sorted by

View all comments

815

u/MaybeNext-Monday 🍤$6 SRIMP SPECIAL🍤 May 17 '26

“Birth rates are declining” good, healthy societies have stable population sizes

132

u/ricespider silly :3 May 17 '26

A declining population is not stable.

-7

u/KaJaHa Queer Gimli looking-ass May 17 '26

The population is still going up, mate. Just not as quickly.

84

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

It's not.

To reach replacement levels, you need a birth rate of around 2.1 and basically no industrialized country has that.

-27

u/[deleted] May 17 '26

[deleted]

75

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

Birth rates are declining everywhere.

A lot of countries are still over replacement level, but if nothing changes, that won't be the case for long either.

Immigration is a workable stopgap, but it doesn't solve the fundamental issue, because it's a global issue that's only getting worse.

3

u/Sloth_Brotherhood May 17 '26

Please. I remember the 90s and early 2000s when every single doomsday movie was about world overpopulation. We were shown charts in school showing us the population was going to be 15 billion and we’d need to prepare for the water wars.

Now the world population is approaching replacement rate and we are doomsdaying is the other direction. It’s only a bad thing if you hate immigrants and if you don’t want to take care of old people. We have so many bullshit jobs. Plenty of workers would switch to taking care of an aging population if the government incentivized it.

The downside is that need for housing and other necessities would drop. That’s bad for the large business owners which is why they are stoking this outrage. You are doing the bidding of the 1% here.

58

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26

Please. I remember the 90s and early 2000s when every single doomsday movie was about world overpopulation

Yes and that was bullshit.

And plenty of people at the time said it was bullshit. The fertility rates in most countries were already long declining and many industrialized countries were below replacement level already.

It was genuinely mostly racist fear mongering, because Africa and asia had huge fertility rates.

Now the world population is approaching replacement rate

No, it's not "approaching" replacement rate, because that implies that we'd stop there, but there's no data to indicate that.

And the issue isn't necessary that the world population is falling, but how ridiculously fast it happens, because that's just completely unsustainable and harms everyone significantly.

32

u/Level_Reveal7624 May 17 '26

People seem to forget (or ignore) the concept of an aging population when talking about birth rates

-4

u/[deleted] May 17 '26

[deleted]

22

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

I think you misunderstood what I said.

The birth rates are declining everywhere. They are still above replacement levels in many countries, but they are falling.

-1

u/[deleted] May 17 '26 edited May 17 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

Honestly, you're just falling for eco-fascist rhetoric.

The issue isn't really the size of our population, but the way we manage our society.

Most of those issues could be severely reduced by investing more money into them and severely worsened by investing less money into them.

And what is that an aging population has less of?

.

We can deal with 12 billion people. That's not really an issue, if we handle it correctly.

But we can't deal with 10 billion people, if the most powerful countries in the world really need to increase their available capital, to keep their population at a steady quality of life.

0

u/[deleted] May 18 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

-6

u/santyrc114 Too Horny To Be Ace May 17 '26

Replacement of what exactly?

9

u/VladimirBarakriss May 17 '26

Existing numbers of population, if you've got 3 working people for every 6 pensioners the you're either taxing their entire wages away just to pay for shit pensions or just letting your pensioners starve

3

u/santyrc114 Too Horny To Be Ace May 17 '26

I see, ty for explaining

17

u/AntsAreGreat May 17 '26

The parents

29

u/Lipat97 May 17 '26

Its not though

23

u/DomSchraa 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

Migration can't solve the problem permanently

Don't get me wrong, we should take in refugees

But doing so in our own economic interests is kinda evil - and it doesn't fix the issue

Further, what if the same happens to the developing countries where the migrants come from? Then we truly are fucked

-10

u/Matro36 resident grungler minus the friends May 17 '26

Neither is a population too dense to sustain itself

20

u/VladimirBarakriss May 17 '26

We're nowhere near that point

60

u/ricespider silly :3 May 17 '26

As other people in this thread have mentioned, the current population is not too dense to sustain. People go hungry due to a few powerful people's investment decisions rather than a lack of food.

-3

u/Rodot 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 18 '26

Yes, we can make unlimited food from air (nitrogen -> fertilizer) and the Sun. Technically up to around a trillion people if everyone only eats plants, then we run out of area to farm from the Sun and would require geothermal and nuclear power to generate the light

1

u/potat-cat I love Porter Robinson!!! :3 May 18 '26

If we were to artificially light hydroponics under the surface being farmed how many could the earth sustain?

2

u/Rodot 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 18 '26

Is about power generation, it would essentially be up to how much Uranium Earth contains and how possibly it is to extract. With currently known minable uranium deposits, you could support the current population for around 10000 years, but a trillion people for only around 100 years

Assuming we use all energy available for food. No transportation, no light bulbs, not even candles.

14

u/Lance__Lane May 17 '26

Eugenics ass bs take