This is the thing I keep circling around, even the edge-case projections for population decline have it taking hundreds of years to drop from a peak of ~10 billion to a low of hundreds of millions of people. We’re not on the verge of extinction.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
It actually probably evens out because China lies about their gigantic number and might be inflating. There probably is an uncounted population but even if it was the size of the United States, it’s a rounding error (8.2 current population just becomes 8.5).
The massive decline scenario makes assumptions, primarily that the whole world will achieve the low birth rates of developed countries BUT that there will be no advancement in longevity. This is extremely unlike.
Most demographers think this is the median: we stop growing but only decline a bit.
if they actually believe this graph, they're even dumber than i expected (and i hadn't believed them to be very intelligent). it's absurd to apply US birth rates globally and act as though they wouldn't change even with changing material conditions
Haha this is a fascinating thought experiment. If you randomly reduced the human population how small would it have to be for me to be among the 450 best basketball players?
At least by a factor of 1,000 at my best, probably by a factor of +10,000 now.
Comments
And we should question those reasons! It’s honestly more alarming to be alarmed by this.
This article is kind of full of itself, I detailed some of my issues with it: https://x.com/Craigipedia/status/1703884086941565333
Most demographers think this is the median: we stop growing but only decline a bit.
Why are we expending so much attention to this stuff? If you want to make it easier to have children you can do that without being an oppressive scold. https://bsky.app/profile/bmceuen.bsky.social/post/3lmmtefdl422j
At least by a factor of 1,000 at my best, probably by a factor of +10,000 now.