Human population growth is already plateaued and in the most developed nations it’s already net negative. in order to sustain break-even (human) population levels, there must be no fewer than 2.1 offspring born, on average, per {gestational reproductive caste specimen}<irrespective of masculine or feminine configuration>.
The human population of South Korea’s last reported birthrate is 0.78.
In japan, 1.26.
In the united states, 1.66.
There will be so few able bodied humans extant to perform basic upkeep in 20 years that fundamental infrastructural systems will not JUST be crumbling to dust from sheer neglect as they are now, but actively self-destructing from sustained systemic cascade failure.
There will be so few able bodied humans extant to perform basic upkeep in 20 years that fundamental infrastructural systems will not JUST be crumbling to dust from sheer neglect as they are now, but actively self-destructing from sustained systemic cascade failure.
Pretty doomerist of you. I’m honestly not concerned about declining populations. Better for the environment, and we’ll figure out the rest through straightforward economics.
I hope so too. One of the key problems you have is taking care of the elderly and infirm with less and less of the younger generation around. It’s a hard one to solve economically without being like “I guess just let them die”.
As the size of the working population declines, labor will reallocate itself from less necessary positions to more necessary ones. So the proportion of the population that would have worked at McDonalds, for example, would work in nursing homes instead.
You’re right and that’s exactly where the problem arises. We’re seeing projections in some places where the need for care workers of various types looks like it will be larger than that countries workforce can bear. I.e., at current levels, there wouldn’t be anyone to work at McDonald’s but then also not enough to work in more necessary roles, basic government, infrastructure, etc.
they have no clue what percentage of people are porn consumers, huh?
91.5% of men and 60.2% of women herein reported having consumed pornography in the past month.
deleted by creator
Human population growth is already plateaued and in the most developed nations it’s already net negative. in order to sustain break-even (human) population levels, there must be no fewer than 2.1 offspring born, on average, per {gestational reproductive caste specimen}<irrespective of masculine or feminine configuration>.
The human population of South Korea’s last reported birthrate is 0.78.
In japan, 1.26.
In the united states, 1.66.
There will be so few able bodied humans extant to perform basic upkeep in 20 years that fundamental infrastructural systems will not JUST be crumbling to dust from sheer neglect as they are now, but actively self-destructing from sustained systemic cascade failure.
deleted by creator
Pretty doomerist of you. I’m honestly not concerned about declining populations. Better for the environment, and we’ll figure out the rest through straightforward economics.
I hope so too. One of the key problems you have is taking care of the elderly and infirm with less and less of the younger generation around. It’s a hard one to solve economically without being like “I guess just let them die”.
As the size of the working population declines, labor will reallocate itself from less necessary positions to more necessary ones. So the proportion of the population that would have worked at McDonalds, for example, would work in nursing homes instead.
You’re right and that’s exactly where the problem arises. We’re seeing projections in some places where the need for care workers of various types looks like it will be larger than that countries workforce can bear. I.e., at current levels, there wouldn’t be anyone to work at McDonald’s but then also not enough to work in more necessary roles, basic government, infrastructure, etc.
Increased worker productivity via technology can also help here. Also, immigration.