You really lost me with this one. Depopulation is about the only good thing happening in the world. Economic growth based on population growth is a Ponzi scheme. The sooner it ends, the better.
This spin that makes de-population seem so important doesn't consider the fact that there are between 6 and 8 billion too many people right now. But, that isn't all. The fact is, global population is increasing and will continue to increase for decades to come:
On 15 November 2022, the world’s population reached 8 billion people, a milestone in human development. While it took the global population 12 years to grow from 7 to 8 billion, it will take approximately 15 years—until 2037— for it to reach 9 billion, a sign that the overall growth rate of the global population is slowing.
The so called "white empire" is dying as it should. Worrying about population decline is silly.
I agree, but this article made me think about the societal and economic destruction that will happen/ is happening. However, I think climate change will end our civilization before the damage population decline does to the economy. Climate disaster after disaster will devastate cities and food growing areas, and the resulting migrations/ deaths will bring nations down.
Our media has us focused on climate change, but a dozen other environmental factors have gone beyond the tipping point, and though all this is interwoven, each one is “quietly” capable of bringing our house of cards down [topsoil loss; acidification of the oceans; destruction of biodiversity; over-fishing; toxicification of soil/water/air; etc.]. I mention this b/c to me it feels relevant as some propose the notion if we”solve the climate crisis” we will be okay. This is false. Our modern industrialized economies are built on the principle of growth, as referenced in the essay, and recognition of limits to resources is not factored into this required “growth.” Humans society can only survive with a paradigm shift in our relationship to the world. But even that is a bit of hopeful idealism, as first some will have to survive the coming crisis. Imagine for instance, when the grid goes out in just one region of the US, how long before the nuclear reactors run out of power to keep them cooling…
I don't think B's essay intended to decry falling population as much as it intended to warn us of the pain that will accompany falling population.
For example, those of us who are "of a certain age" — where will our pensions come from, as more and more retired people depend on the resource funded by fewer and fewer wage-earners?
Personally, I intend to find or form an age-diverse community, where I can become indispensable to young people. I have no idea how this will work out, but I *do* know that drawing a pension for the next 20-30 years isn't going to work! (I'm rather amazed that I'm able to do that right now… never thought *that* was going to happen!)
The population bomb is still exploding. During the next 50 years the population of Nigeria will increase from 220 million to 580, Congo from 100 to 290 million. As you have explained very well in earlier articles, they will not have sufficient energy and resources to feed that population increase, and wars, civil unrest and climate change will make millions migrate. A likely destination will be Europe, where the aging Europeans will be replaced by young, starving Africans. After that we might see the impact of a depopulation bomb. For my part I’m hoping for a future world with one billion inhabitants instead of eight, such a planet might be sustainable.
There is little incentive to train to do the hard physical jobs that need doing. In the past it was a sacrifice men accepted in exchange for having the money to support a family. Now the mentality of many people (myself included) is very different. I myself am living more for the present especially when I know how bleak the future will get. People will accept sacrifices if they have something to believe in but the emptiness of modernity discourages this.
Thanks B. Looking through the comments it seems like maybe 25% get that this has implications for their own lives which will be difficult and likely unpleasant. That's not to say that there is something "wrong with reality", to lay out what is happening, and the unpleasant implications.
There are other possible futures, and you have been carful not to predict too many specifics, other than what are apparent from thermoceconomics, demographics and the costs of extraction of oil, coal, iron ore and copper, for instance.
You really lost me with this one. Depopulation is about the only good thing happening in the world. Economic growth based on population growth is a Ponzi scheme. The sooner it ends, the better.
I agree Kate;
This spin that makes de-population seem so important doesn't consider the fact that there are between 6 and 8 billion too many people right now. But, that isn't all. The fact is, global population is increasing and will continue to increase for decades to come:
https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population
On 15 November 2022, the world’s population reached 8 billion people, a milestone in human development. While it took the global population 12 years to grow from 7 to 8 billion, it will take approximately 15 years—until 2037— for it to reach 9 billion, a sign that the overall growth rate of the global population is slowing.
The so called "white empire" is dying as it should. Worrying about population decline is silly.
I agree, but this article made me think about the societal and economic destruction that will happen/ is happening. However, I think climate change will end our civilization before the damage population decline does to the economy. Climate disaster after disaster will devastate cities and food growing areas, and the resulting migrations/ deaths will bring nations down.
Our media has us focused on climate change, but a dozen other environmental factors have gone beyond the tipping point, and though all this is interwoven, each one is “quietly” capable of bringing our house of cards down [topsoil loss; acidification of the oceans; destruction of biodiversity; over-fishing; toxicification of soil/water/air; etc.]. I mention this b/c to me it feels relevant as some propose the notion if we”solve the climate crisis” we will be okay. This is false. Our modern industrialized economies are built on the principle of growth, as referenced in the essay, and recognition of limits to resources is not factored into this required “growth.” Humans society can only survive with a paradigm shift in our relationship to the world. But even that is a bit of hopeful idealism, as first some will have to survive the coming crisis. Imagine for instance, when the grid goes out in just one region of the US, how long before the nuclear reactors run out of power to keep them cooling…
I don't think B's essay intended to decry falling population as much as it intended to warn us of the pain that will accompany falling population.
For example, those of us who are "of a certain age" — where will our pensions come from, as more and more retired people depend on the resource funded by fewer and fewer wage-earners?
Personally, I intend to find or form an age-diverse community, where I can become indispensable to young people. I have no idea how this will work out, but I *do* know that drawing a pension for the next 20-30 years isn't going to work! (I'm rather amazed that I'm able to do that right now… never thought *that* was going to happen!)
At some point - a straw will be placed on the back of BAU - and it will implode into a trillion pieces
Fortunately -- that won't happen -- cuz we are being exterminated
https://www.headsupster.com/forumthread?shortId=220
The population bomb is still exploding. During the next 50 years the population of Nigeria will increase from 220 million to 580, Congo from 100 to 290 million. As you have explained very well in earlier articles, they will not have sufficient energy and resources to feed that population increase, and wars, civil unrest and climate change will make millions migrate. A likely destination will be Europe, where the aging Europeans will be replaced by young, starving Africans. After that we might see the impact of a depopulation bomb. For my part I’m hoping for a future world with one billion inhabitants instead of eight, such a planet might be sustainable.
There is little incentive to train to do the hard physical jobs that need doing. In the past it was a sacrifice men accepted in exchange for having the money to support a family. Now the mentality of many people (myself included) is very different. I myself am living more for the present especially when I know how bleak the future will get. People will accept sacrifices if they have something to believe in but the emptiness of modernity discourages this.
Thank you B🙏
Lovely synthesis.
Thanks B. Looking through the comments it seems like maybe 25% get that this has implications for their own lives which will be difficult and likely unpleasant. That's not to say that there is something "wrong with reality", to lay out what is happening, and the unpleasant implications.
There are other possible futures, and you have been carful not to predict too many specifics, other than what are apparent from thermoceconomics, demographics and the costs of extraction of oil, coal, iron ore and copper, for instance.
Nice work. "Interesting times."
;-(
Really fine article. Thank you!