Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Selfish reasons to want more humans

rootsofprogress.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 480 posts

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#351

Post by jhardy54 »

dotancohen wrote: post #304
pseudocomposer wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should anyone be forced not to have kids? We could all have one and the population would halve in a generation.

I have three children, not unusual for my culture. My community's gardener has 14 children, low for his culture but he's still young. He's only on his second wife and he just passed 40 years old. Are you going to tell him that he needs to change his culture? Arguably he could have a lot to say about our culture spewing out hydrocarbons being damaging to the planet, which would be justified far before we criticise his…

> Arguably he could have a lot to say about our culture spewing out hydrocarbons being damaging to the planet […]

Good?

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#353

Post by deeviant »

Yes, but how many geniuses will live in squalor and never be given the proper environment to thrive?

I know I'd rather there be geniuses but who are given a life to support their growth and contributions, of which perhaps half really realize their potential, than more geniuses where most struggle to find even the basic necessities, let alone the support and resources needed for their talents to flourish. It's not just about the quantity of geniuses that a larger population might yield, but the quality of life and opportunities available to them.

Having a high number of geniuses doesn't automatically translate to societal progress or innovation if the conditions aren't conducive to their development. It's essential to create an environment where potential can be recognized and nurtured. This means investing in education, healthcare, and social programs that help identify and support individuals with extraordinary abilities, regardless of their background. The goal should be to maximize the potential of every individual, not just increase the population in hopes of statistically getting more geniuses.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#354

Post by powera »

Progress isn't infinite, status is often a zero-sum competition, and exponential economic growth is something that only people who are bad-at-math want (and should they be doing economics?). Also, the whole essay is begging-the-question; so much of the argument is <<we need more people because "more is better".

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#355

Post by pixl97 »

naasking wrote: post #329
zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can encourage lower reproduction with tax incentives. Nothing wrong with that.

We don't need to encourage it, birth control and capitalism have already produced a depopulation trend in all developed countries. It's not a good thing.

It's not a good thing because???? I'll accept a well reasoned argument, but you've not presented any yet in this discussion and engaged in your own naturalistic fallacies. If you're using the reason that "Wanting to breed is natural" then surmise that you've never been involved in animal husbandry before. Nor have you studied mammal populations between species, especially those that have boom and bust cycles.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#356

Post by moralestapia »

Wow, I get it is an opinion piece so it shouldn't be fact-checked, but still, what an absolutely ignorant and naive take on the subject.

It seems like the author has never come across the concept of what a "Behavioral sink" is, which is not really hard to find/understand; as well as the many other sources of data, experiments and thoughts that would easily invalidate the purported benefits he portrays.

"More geniuses, more R&D investment, more ambitious projects, better aesthetics, better careers, more niche communities, more niche markets"; no correlation between this and population size. If you take a look at the most populated cities on Earth, about 8/10 are FAR from being "an aesthetic population center where people live happy and fulfilled lives, with artists and geniuses together to improve human progress". Had the author not traveled outside the US ever in life?

"but that's due to economic and social factors that have kept them subdued for centuries"

1. It's not ...

2. ... even if it was, why would a larger population get rid of those issues instead of making them worse?

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#357

Post by pixl97 »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #339
matwood wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They cannot be utilized because they live in shitty conditions created by the too large population we already have. Or they just live in a shitty place under some autocratic/dictator/religious rule. I'm not sure that has much to do with the population size.

Don't you think those bad leaders would've had a harder time coming into power if there had been less contention over resources? If it's clear that there's plenty to go around you can just abandon a bad leader. If not, then maybe tolerating them is a necessary evil (because they control the food).

>Don't you think those bad leaders would've had a harder time coming into power if there had been less contention over resources?

No. For most of human history we've been lead by shitty autocratic leaders. Now, when there's too little to go around we're more apt to go to war and/or have population migrations which is a different subject.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#358

Post by AndrewKemendo »

pixl97 wrote: post #349
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a Delta flight that is flying exclusively for the pleasure of a tiny group of people who want to watch the eclipse for multiple hours https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39447603 The concept that we’re resource constrained to the extent that we’re beyond the carrying capacity of the world is beyond ridiculous We have a greed, fear and distribution problem, not a production problem Nobody needs a Ferrari when…

>Don’t complain about the state of the world unless you’re actively fixing it What kind of backwards ass thinking is this. I mean, stop and think for at least one second before typing things like this. If I'm living hand to mouth, as in if I stop farming my own food I'll quickly starve it would be stupid to, one, stop growing my own stuff because I'll starve otherwise, and two, not complain about the situation becaus…

How could you possibly interpret what I wrote as an exhortation against the poor?

Should I specifically explicate the groups that this exhortation is targeted to?

Use your judgement based on the content and context instead of requiring me to think for you and fully solve all of the questions you might have.

Do you own a Ferrari? Are you taking the Delta flight? Can you extrapolate from those two examples of egregious veblen good luxuries (Veblen himself writkng a thourough exhortation himself!) to think of other ones which do or do not apply to you and then you determine whether that applies?

Jfc

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#359

Post by pixl97 »

lukas099 wrote: post #326
dave4420 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The global population is projected to go down to 6 billion by the end of the century, without any coercion or policy changes. This drives people like the author of the article mad, because they think we should do something to prevent that.

> The global population is projected to go down to 6 billion by the end of the century Source? I thought it was expected to stabilize around 10B or so

Source UN Population to 2300

https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.deve...

Now the issue is both OP and you are taking one of the trend lines rather than looking at the projection spread. Ops seems slightly off as the UN numbers are showing 10B max and 7.4B min.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#360

Post by pixl97 »

dotancohen wrote: post #304
pseudocomposer wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should anyone be forced not to have kids? We could all have one and the population would halve in a generation.

I have three children, not unusual for my culture. My community's gardener has 14 children, low for his culture but he's still young. He's only on his second wife and he just passed 40 years old. Are you going to tell him that he needs to change his culture? Arguably he could have a lot to say about our culture spewing out hydrocarbons being damaging to the planet, which would be justified far before we criticise his…

>Are you going to tell him that he needs to change his culture

If you're going to life a modern lifestyle, yes 100%. Modern human lifestyles are hyper energy/resource intensive. The reason people had 14 kids back when is 1. most of the kids died, and 2, the kids were work resources. If 1 and 2 no longer hold, then yea, change.

Post reply on HN