Re:Being poor changes your thinking about everything
by tsotha on Saturday September 14, 2013 @06:41PM
(#6387351)
>Why do you equate lack of population growth with a bad future?
When the health of your social programs is based on continued population growth the future may indeed be grim without it.
Re:Being poor changes your thinking about everything
by PeterisP on Sunday September 15, 2013 @01:26PM
(#6389624)
Actually, the health of our social programs isn't that based on continued population growth; they'd work pretty much the same with a stable population size.
However, the bane of those social programs is quickly increasing lifespans. No matter if population growth is zero or huge, if you're currently below 45, you anyway have to "prepare for yourself" rather than expect them to survive in the current form - unless the retirement age moves beyond 80 within this decade.
Re:Being poor changes your thinking about everything
by tsotha on Monday September 16, 2013 @06:58PM
(#6396447)
I don't see how you can separate the two. The current system used to work because the population was growing and people didn't live as long. Either change would be enough to result in lower benefits.
USA was a perfectly fine country back in 1990 when it had 250m people; and it would be a perfectly fine country if it'd have 250m people today instead of the current 315m.
In fact (contrary to "nothing that increases happiness half as much as having a child") I'd say that the Earth might be a happier place if the future had, say, 1-2 billion people instead of the current 7b or expected 10b - as everybody would have a larger share of the fundamentally limited natural resources, freshwater and space.
If the current resources were distributed somewhat fairly, then noone could have a lifestyle approaching even the "first world" working class - quality life is possible either for an unfairly small part of population, or if there is less population in the first place; and low-by-choice fertility is the most reasonable way to achieve that.