The Future Is Too Expensive – A New Theory on Collapsing Birth Rates

The starvation thing that appears throughout this larger thread is exceptionally odd to me, how does a planet where food is mostly harvested mechanically, encounter food shortages in the face of decreased population? Even if the labor force plummets, the machines sow, tend, and harvest most of the food, and the amount of required food is also going to down as the population does.

> people who add no economic value are a problem for our societies as they are structured today.

There's no denying that, I think it's a pretty balanced statement, but a lot of people would point the finger at "as they are structured today".

The fact is, tech advances have been disrupting established social patterns of providing "economic value" from the beginning. And while the Luddites might be pointed to as an example that the world marches on, they actually do serve as a very good example of how the world marches on, with ownership reaping a bigger piece of the economic pie, and labor reaping less.

Working people have been increasingly disadvantaged by tech advances in pretty much every single case, from the beginning of tech advances.

Inequality is on a scale with all time record highs at this point, and tech is being applied to fields never approached before.

So, it's also reality that fewer and fewer people are needed to operate society.

There are already too many people, and fewer and fewer are able to provide "economic value" (the statement of which is silent on who receives that economic value, because it's assumed that it's not value until it's received by ownership. This is just by definition).

One natural consequence we're seeing of this, is that fewer people want to have kids.

Everyone should be happy about this. It means the economic value can be spread more densely while leaving fewer people lacking, and we obtain a greater ability to continue generating economic value into the future. Because the "trashing the planet" consequences are not a joke, even though the owners of the world's largest wealth are treating them that way.

We don't need eugenics, all we have to do is facilitate the already existing population declines, which again, is the opposite of what ownership is trying to do. It's all a panic because the ponzi scheme is going to implode.

1 billion people on the planet would be plenty... Why is that so hard to believe? Why is that so impossible to accomplish?

For all the brilliant advances and innovation that the world's wealth holders are supposed to be "creating", to me they seem pretty cluelessly unable to grasp even the basic facts in front of them and chart a path forward...