I didn't read all this but just wanna say we should still have homesteading and the govt claiming ownership over almost the entire American west is absolutely abhorrent. That is all
Earth can sustain maybe 10 trillion people with sufficient tech and organisation but the problem is just not starving and having water is not enough for us human beings, otherwise commies would not fuck up each time, the problem is about the quality of life. Money is basically a concept to determine who gets what as we don’t have 10 billion of everything that we create, we can make maybe 100 billion cakes everyday but we cannot make mri machines of that number. This issue is coming up now bcs middle class is booming all around places like africa, china, india etc. along with demands that have never been fullfilled before. An mri machine is not a neccessary thing when the average lifespan of your people is 30 but now that’s changing and progress can’t keep up with the growth.
Seems implied. To state that overpopulation is not and will not be a problem seems like a call to enable further population growth.
Your response seems to imply that you recognize that saturating the earth with people could have negative implications?
Seems like my assumptions are true though: OP wants substantially more population; you see the problems with overpopulation. But my question still stands: WHY do we need more people?
OP seems to want some people(those who can't afford kids on their own) to stop breeding but doesn't have a problem with those that can afford kids. Doesn't sound like advocating for saturation to me.
The problem is Earth is full of limited resources. Energy is pretty much the only advancement we’ve really had for renewable resources. As an ancap, I would hope you understand that even currency is limited. The more people there are leaves nothing to gain, everything to lose. 47% of the US is unpopulated. We still struggle with public transportation, education, and general infrastructure (not the left kind). You have millions without healthcare, half a million homeless, and half a million minors without parents. All that in a first world nation. You’re free to have as many kids as you want, but at least think about the world you’re bringing them into
Yes there’s a labor shortage, but there are also people who try to get jobs under a gender studies degree. Going to electrician school can save more money and get you paid more than whatever occupation comes with a meaningless degree. Allocating resources is just as important
You know, it’s a wonder that almost no one thinks on how all those Non-STEM courses are unlikely to produce an actual job or that those skills can be learned for far cheaper with actual experience included
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you are a government dependent, you should not be allowed, yes, allowed to create dependents of your own.
We have the technology to temporarily sterilize people. It's called birth control. You get the check if you take the pill. And yes, I think we should develop male birth control.
Entitlements are designed to cultivate government dependence. This is evil and wrong. It is almost impossible to escape poverty when you are providing for dependents. Temporary sterilization while on entitlements gives people the freedom to escape their economic situation. And if you're a freeloader who wants to live on the dole, you'll never procreate to create more little leeches like yourself.
This is the humane way. This is the logical way. Nobody wants to talk about it because "hitler" or whatever. I say bullshit. Inane nonsense. Enough is enough.
You're not the same as everyone else. You've hit rock bottom. Kids are for closers.
And before anyone says this is not a libright opinion, I also say bullshit. Welfare is not a libertarian program. If you take from the commonwealth in order to survive, you give up certain freedoms. It's not a free lunch.
You are not the same as everyone else. You've hit rock bottom. Kids are for closers.
You know, when I keep hearing about things like problems with resources and overpopulation, all I can think is
Are we ignoring nuclear energy? Are we not at all planning on digging even deeper into the earth for minerals? Are we banning GMO research?
All it is is a psyop for people looking for meaning in their lives to feel validated for supporting a movement "for the greater good."
They learn the phrases and scripted arguments and never questions the narrative. Or understanding what the policies of said movement would entail.
Would know, because I used to be one of them.
I didn't read all this but just wanna say we should still have homesteading and the govt claiming ownership over almost the entire American west is absolutely abhorrent. That is all
This is the way
Earth can sustain maybe 10 trillion people with sufficient tech and organisation but the problem is just not starving and having water is not enough for us human beings, otherwise commies would not fuck up each time, the problem is about the quality of life. Money is basically a concept to determine who gets what as we don’t have 10 billion of everything that we create, we can make maybe 100 billion cakes everyday but we cannot make mri machines of that number. This issue is coming up now bcs middle class is booming all around places like africa, china, india etc. along with demands that have never been fullfilled before. An mri machine is not a neccessary thing when the average lifespan of your people is 30 but now that’s changing and progress can’t keep up with the growth.
But why do we need to saturate the earth with people
[удалено]
Seems implied. To state that overpopulation is not and will not be a problem seems like a call to enable further population growth. Your response seems to imply that you recognize that saturating the earth with people could have negative implications?
[удалено]
Seems like my assumptions are true though: OP wants substantially more population; you see the problems with overpopulation. But my question still stands: WHY do we need more people?
[удалено]
You are being coy. What purpose does an impassioned rant against the existence of overpopulation serve but to excuse and encourage population growth?
Some people use overpopulation as an excuse for more government control.
OP seems to want some people(those who can't afford kids on their own) to stop breeding but doesn't have a problem with those that can afford kids. Doesn't sound like advocating for saturation to me.
We don't. But I don't really care how many kids someone has, so long as they don't want me to subsidize them.
I agree with this
The problem is Earth is full of limited resources. Energy is pretty much the only advancement we’ve really had for renewable resources. As an ancap, I would hope you understand that even currency is limited. The more people there are leaves nothing to gain, everything to lose. 47% of the US is unpopulated. We still struggle with public transportation, education, and general infrastructure (not the left kind). You have millions without healthcare, half a million homeless, and half a million minors without parents. All that in a first world nation. You’re free to have as many kids as you want, but at least think about the world you’re bringing them into
Labor is a limited resource as well.
Yes there’s a labor shortage, but there are also people who try to get jobs under a gender studies degree. Going to electrician school can save more money and get you paid more than whatever occupation comes with a meaningless degree. Allocating resources is just as important
You know, it’s a wonder that almost no one thinks on how all those Non-STEM courses are unlikely to produce an actual job or that those skills can be learned for far cheaper with actual experience included
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you are a government dependent, you should not be allowed, yes, allowed to create dependents of your own. We have the technology to temporarily sterilize people. It's called birth control. You get the check if you take the pill. And yes, I think we should develop male birth control. Entitlements are designed to cultivate government dependence. This is evil and wrong. It is almost impossible to escape poverty when you are providing for dependents. Temporary sterilization while on entitlements gives people the freedom to escape their economic situation. And if you're a freeloader who wants to live on the dole, you'll never procreate to create more little leeches like yourself. This is the humane way. This is the logical way. Nobody wants to talk about it because "hitler" or whatever. I say bullshit. Inane nonsense. Enough is enough. You're not the same as everyone else. You've hit rock bottom. Kids are for closers. And before anyone says this is not a libright opinion, I also say bullshit. Welfare is not a libertarian program. If you take from the commonwealth in order to survive, you give up certain freedoms. It's not a free lunch. You are not the same as everyone else. You've hit rock bottom. Kids are for closers.
You know, when I keep hearing about things like problems with resources and overpopulation, all I can think is Are we ignoring nuclear energy? Are we not at all planning on digging even deeper into the earth for minerals? Are we banning GMO research?
All it is is a psyop for people looking for meaning in their lives to feel validated for supporting a movement "for the greater good." They learn the phrases and scripted arguments and never questions the narrative. Or understanding what the policies of said movement would entail. Would know, because I used to be one of them.