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

421–430 of 480 posts

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#421

Post by dotancohen »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #415
pixl97 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

I would bet the reason was women did not have an option to say no to having 14 kids. Although, in this supposed gardener’s culture, one guy had multiple wives, and that is obviously not a dynamic that leads to a steady, peaceful society based on all the prevailing customs around the world.

I've spoken to a few Bedouin women, though less than men. I've never heard any say that they are unhappy with the quantity of children they raise. That's their culture, why would they be unhappy?

One thing that I've heard them say they are unhappy about are the marrying of additional wives. One particular conversation was with two wives of the same man. The older wife said that she did not want her husband to marry, but over time she began to like the younger wife. In the particular case of the gardener, his first wife told him to marry because the first two children were born unhealthy.

I'd say about half the Bedouins I speak to have multiple wives.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#422

Post by anemoiac »

hef19898 wrote: post #411
anemoiac wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't most of the so-called "West" already be in the process of depopulation, based on current birthrates, if not for immigration from other regions?

No, just in a demographically problematic situation of having a bad ratio of young vs. old people.

That would also be true but, yes, the population would be decreasing without immigration from regions with higher birth rates.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#423

Post by nec4b »

defrost wrote: post #418
nec4b wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of what you said would be possible with a dwindling population. We do not live in a Star trek utopia where at press of a button every wish is synthesized by a machine. More people can simply get more done. There is a good reason why most of the stuff, new discoveries and technologies come from big countries and not from small ones. Even rich countries per capita with small population size do not build huge infra…

All of this was put in motion with a population much smaller than todays. The bulk of it was achieved with a population smaller than todays. The ongoing work being planned doesn't require the population to grow, there is demand enough from a growing proportion wanting a greater standard of living and a world making a massive transition in base energy.

>> All of this was put in motion with a population much smaller than todays.

Your logic is circular. Because we can go all the way back to first few humans ever to exist and say they put it into motion, therefore a small group of couple of hundred of people is enough. Or go into other direction and dream what new wonders the next 40 years would bring with the rising population.

>> The ongoing work being planned doesn't require the population to grow, there is demand enough from a growing proportion wanting a greater standard of living and a world making a massive transition in base energy.

It doesn't have to grow, but we are not talking about growing we are talking about shrinking.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#424

Post by skulk »

Zababa wrote: post #364
throwaway295729 wrote: post #39

This may be a bit reductive but the article is basically saying that the larger the population the quicker progress and innovation will occur. What’s unclear though is if this progress and innovation leads to greater human happiness and fulfillment. As we’ve seen lately, the opposite could also be true. With climate change on the horizon, we may have even reached peak human happiness sometime in the late 20th century

Progress and innovation absolutely does lead to greater human happiness and fulfillment. As an example, absolute number of people living in extreme poverty started to sharply decline at the start of the 21st century: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-population-in-extre... .

That chart does abysmally little to support your claim, for a few reasons.

1) How many of those people in the green live on less than $5 a day? $1.90 per day is an absurd and arbitrary limit which feels cherry picked to make a Pinker-esque pleasing chart.

2) It hardly goes back in time. I'd like to know how happy hunter-gatherers were 20k years ago. Maybe I could go ask the North Sentinelese but I think building a time machine might be easier than getting a straight answer from them.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#425

Post by Affric »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #140
Affric wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your edits have certainly improved both comments. Population decline doesn’t guarantee human liberty. Factory farms reflect the hierarchies we see in society. Not the other way around. I can see unfree (in a non-trivial sense) human labour becoming more valuable in a world with less human labour and no suitable substitutes. Global population is not quite orthogonal to many of our social problems.

Surplus labor is power to those in power. Scarce labor empowers the individual. Compressing demographics is good for the individual, but bad for economic and political systems.

This is true to an extent but we have never really seen an information economy with a global labour scarcity. If we look at "advanced" economies with physical labour scarcities we see infrastructure deficits and inflation in asset prices.

Having worked behind a computer and behind hammers, saws, on ladders, et cetera I think that political/economic collapse might not be ideal. With that said perhaps my socialist history teachers couldn't overcome the immense power of British propaganda against revolution.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#426

Post by toomuchtodo »

Affric wrote: post #425
toomuchtodo wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surplus labor is power to those in power. Scarce labor empowers the individual. Compressing demographics is good for the individual, but bad for economic and political systems.

This is true to an extent but we have never really seen an information economy with a global labour scarcity. If we look at "advanced" economies with physical labour scarcities we see infrastructure deficits and inflation in asset prices. Having worked behind a computer and behind hammers, saws, on ladders, et cetera I think that political/economic collapse might not be ideal. With that said perhaps my socialist hist…

If current state is a form of economic slavery, alternatives may be welcome. Depends on your point of view I suppose, as well as your role and position in the system. Some may welcome decline over current state and the cost it imposes.

https://www.news18.com/india/frustrated-over-being-unemploye...

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/05/31/asia-pacific/ch...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/26/the-rise-of-ba...

https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxjqyb/south-korea-69-hour-w...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_work_environment

https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39504981

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#427

Post by xetplan »

adrian_b wrote: post #173
ido wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of people living in good conditions is also higher than it ever was. In fact the % of people living poverty world wide is decreasing while world population is increasing.

That depends a lot on how you define "good conditions". My grandparents did not have television or computers, but they (and most people from their village) had a much bigger house and garden than I could ever afford and they were eating much better food than I can find anywhere in a city now, despite having nominally much lower revenues than I have today. Some of their tastiest fruit cultivars might have completely d…

This has nothing to do with reality other than the N=1 sample of your grandparents.

How can anyone believe this is beyond me. The entire line of thought is just so utterly clueless.

If you go back 50 years the average person worked a mindless factory job, never traveled very far, never went out to eat. Work your boring/mindless job, come home to your small house and drink yourself to sleep while watching some shitty sitcoms on TV. Or you could go to the bar on the way home from your mindless job. Take your pick.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#428

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

synecdoche wrote: post #216
strangattractor wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2 most prominent proponents of this idea happen to have the resources (money) that will allow them to avoid most of the downsides a larger population would create. Great for them bad for me. There are plenty enough geniuses in existence today. They cannot be utilized because they live in shitty conditions created by the too large population we already have. As others have pointed out consideration of of negative…

How about providing concrete methods for reducing population? Exactly how do you propose to reduce population and who should be forced to not have children first? Should we assume that you will lead by example?

There are a lot of ways to contribute to society without contributing a person, but many parts of our culture consider these ways to be somehow secondary. If we can change this, we can reduce our population without forbidding anyone from having children.

For starters, I think we should increase tax benefits for people who don't have dependents and who are participating in research, or teaching, or nurshing, or ... create a list of activities which we want to see more of but that the market does not prioritize. Let's celebrate, and empower, individuals who take the time they would be spending on their own kids, and instead spend it on solving society's problems.

This would increase the likelihood that somebody without children has the kind of impact which makes them a role model for existing children. This will help erode the idea that people who chose not to have children are somehow defective and will decrease the likelihood that a person decides to have kids.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#429

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

synecdoche wrote: post #222
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, without any coercion or policy changes. I agree. So where is the problem? Replacement is a problem in many parts of the world on the other hand.

Alternative 1: we achieve 6 billion in 2300 because we cannot sustain 7 billion

Alternative 2: we achieve 5 billion in 2300 because we chose to

The quality of life in alternative 2 is higher because we're not right up against constraints that limit us. People feel more secure because there's less contention over resources, they're more likely to take risks like trying new ways of doing things, etc. There's a greater potential for discovery.

So the problem is that if we let nature force us into Alternative 1, we're in for a worse time than we otherwise would be.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#430

Post by lotsofpulp »

dotancohen wrote: post #421
lotsofpulp wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would bet the reason was women did not have an option to say no to having 14 kids. Although, in this supposed gardener’s culture, one guy had multiple wives, and that is obviously not a dynamic that leads to a steady, peaceful society based on all the prevailing customs around the world.

I've spoken to a few Bedouin women, though less than men. I've never heard any say that they are unhappy with the quantity of children they raise. That's their culture, why would they be unhappy? One thing that I've heard them say they are unhappy about are the marrying of additional wives. One particular conversation was with two wives of the same man. The older wife said that she did not want her husband to marry,…

> That's their culture, why would they be unhappy?

Because you have no reason to assume they would tell you the truth, or that they are not lying even to themselves. Actions speak louder than words, and 99% of women who attain financial and physical security choose to not have 14, or even 4 kids.

Post reply on HN