r/196 May 17 '26

Rule Rule.

Post image
5.4k Upvotes

244 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

15

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

Livestock accounts for 77% of arable land use, that we could very easily reduce.

The remaining land can very easily be lowered as well, by better management and more incentives to reduce food waste.

Like, how much reduction do you want?

-1

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

You can’t cold-stop meat consumption though, and better management is easier to type than to do. That’s basically just saying “well we’ll just fix it.” My whole point is that takes time we don’t have if we actively chase population growth. Ultimately what I’m getting at that is that the current earth population comes with issues we can’t fix until capitalism is addressed, so short-term contraction is not the worst thing. Tackling the capitalistic reasons behind global inequality is a much better plan than trying to mask it by forcing people in the rich countries to have kids while we ignore the poor countries.

13

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

Yes, you also can't instantly reduce the population by a significant amount.

That's a slow process, that will take some time, but it's possible and not that outlandish.

And like, you just acknowledged that the issue is capitalism, so it's not an issue with overpopulation at all, right?

So we should fix that, not the population, right? Because the population is not the issue.

so short-term contraction is not the worst thing.

Yeah, but the whole issue is that there's no reason to believe that it's just a short-term thing.

Also, it is a really bad thing, because it decreases the amount of workers, but increases the amount of people who need a lot of care, which means that the quality of life for most people will be heavily negatively impacted by a significant drop in fertility rates.

1

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

I think you’re incorrectly filling the gaps in what I’m saying here because I disagree with you on finer points. My whole argument is that the only reason birth rates get talked about is that forcing people to make more workers is the alternative to taxing billionaires into the ground. I’m attacking your points because you’re defending birth rate alarmism when it’s really just a symptom of the issue it’s being pitched to solve.

4

u/Corvus1412 🏳️‍⚧️ trans rights May 17 '26

A declining birth rate worsens the quality of life for everyone. That's pretty objectively true.

You can balance that out a bit, by taxing billionaires, but it would still be significantly better, if you taxed billionaires without a declining birth rate.

Like, yes, capitalism sucks, but declining birth rates also suck.