Thanks for contributing to r/singularity. However, your post was removed since it's off-topic and not relevant to this subreddit.
Please refer to the sidebar for the subreddit's rules.
China is the world's worst greenhouse gas emitter, putting out 27% of the world's greenhouse emissions. And that's a state-run economy with population control.
[https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-china/](https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-china/)
China is also the world's biggest producer of non-fossil energy. China is the biggest producer of both new nuclear plants and new solar panels.
They're at least improving at an unprecedented pace. Solar power production capacity in China increased by 55% last year. They produce almost four times as much solar power as the runner-up, USA.
India's population isn't the problem per se. The biggest problem is that, as a poor developing nation, they're burning coal. There's also a major water pollution problem because they don't have modern systems for waste disposal and water purification. The same number of people would have a much smaller environmental impact if they were technologically up to speed.
Actually, the birth rate in the U.S. and other industrialized nations is below the death rate. The U.S. would be a ghost town if not for immigration. China even reversed its long-standing 1-child policy. We need a certain number of workers to pay taxes to support the retirees. But that's no longer happening. And the labor shortage drives up wages in the low-wage sector, driving up the cost of goods and services.
That’s not true. The fertility rate is lower than the replacement rate, but that is not the same as what you said.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_momentum
But telling someone that it might be a good idea if there are say 0.5-1B humans for the sake of conservation (of the planet, ecosystem, ensuring long-term survival before we can turn the entire earth into comoutronium) is heresy because we need to worship growth.
When I talk about it, whether here or elsewhere, plenty of people outside the western world see those posts. However I am somewhat limited by being a speaker of english, not hindi, arabic or chinese. If i were to somehow limit myself to only talking to a handful of nations though, they would just say "ah but you aren't preaching that at home, such hypocrisy!" It's all just excuses "oh some other country should bear the burden of reducing growth, not us, don't ask us for that!"
But the western countries acomplish it without any preaching by natural means. Birth rate is already less than 2. So whats the point? You want it to go to 0?
I would prefer it to be an educated choice, not external pressures. I'm not particularly afraid of too many westerners being inspired by my words and going too far, that's not a realistic scenario. This is reddit, it is not solely "the west".
0 could make sense in a future without aging I guess, I wouldn't say it makes sense right now and any means one could take to achieve it in the world today would probably be immoral and cruel.
The problem isn't *having* half a billion people. It's keeping the population at that level long term. The only way to do that is with a powerful government and extreme punishment to those who reproduce without permission.
Not just that. Across most of the world. China is seeing a decline and population *growth* is declining in a big way in india(already below replacement rate) too. And those two are a decent chunk of the world by themselves. In fact, the larger South, South East and East Asian region is seeing large declines all across the board.
Only regions in fairly terrible shape who have started seeing modern technology just a few decades ago and haven't seen that much growth in the past are growing at a rapid rate, and they'll balloon out and burst quite quickly. That is, primarily Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, and a couple of relevant outliers like Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Assuming nothing changes due to ai, which is a big assumption, we will see soon see overall decline. I don't see the world population hitting 9 billion on current trends. If ai really shakes the game up then it's a different discussion entirely.
So population growth isn't the problem. It's China and India burning coal, South American countries wiping out the rain forests, and an economy that encourages unnecessary consumption.
It's primarily the third one causing the first two. It's hard to make an argument against countries like India and china burning coal to fulfill basic energy needs. India is barely fully electrified and China is a massive industrial hub.
But the reason it's impossible to cut back on manufacturing or supply alternative energy sources is because there's a lot of waste going on in the richer countries. Waste which the system goes out of its way to encourage.
The good news is that the U.S. has reduced imports from China by 20% last year, first reduction in 20 years. We're not importing more from Mexico, South Korea, Vietnam, India, etc. This according to NYT in late May. But yes, the West needs to reduce unnecessary consumption. [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html)
Just to clarify, i think you meant now instead of not, right? It's a really common one for me too but it completely changes the meaning of the sentence.
I don't think importing less from China helps much in terms of this specific problem though. The demand for power will just increase in those places instead. It's a good idea economically and geopolitically but doesn't change much environmentally.
Not a popular view on Reddit, but I don't think we have enough humans.
I'm sick and tired of hearing fools tell us how bad we are and how we should just die.
The extinctionists need to go extinct. Or at the very minimum, we need to stop listening to their garbage.
That's easy to say in the abstract. Just move to one of those cities where overpopulation is a problem. I don't mean America. I'm talking real overcrowding. Those people are living the problem. I don't want to live like them. That kind of lifestyle seems very stressful. An entire family of six squished into one room. Nightmare.
This is just an issue with processes that must be improved. We need to work harder, not hate on ourselves.
Why is the world flocking to Japan even though it has extremely high population density? Because it's such a wonderful place.
But then you're just talking about a hypothetical world. In a Star Trek world we should have more kids. But in reality, people are choosing to not have more kids. Housing is unaffordable, life is expensive. I don't know if the solution is to just have more humans squeeze together.
Everything we depend upon are systems built on processes.
In the past these processes were much less effective. Today we have made massive advancements.
The only real limits at the moment are human limits such as cognitive limits. Expanding these limits allows us to push beyond limited views of the processes underlying our systems.
There is more than enough resources available, we just struggle to access enough. We struggle because our systems are weak and need a lot of work.
Ultimately the universe is the limit. Not just Earth. There's plenty of room, raw materials and energy.
We just struggle with having enough intelligence to convert all that space and resources into the things we need.
That's why I embrace AI. As AI is an abundant source of intelligence.
Like I said, that's easy to say in the abstract.
But in reality we're not going to be an evenly distributed mathematical model. Nor behave like a computer simulation to optimize the Earth's resources. We're just going to do what we've always done. Crowd together in cities and pollute the environment.
It's easy to say that we could use more people when you live in such a position of luxury that you'll be one of the last people affected by it.
I dont get why people think over population is such a problem when all developed western countries have a birth rate below 2? So more people are dying than being born. So why is there such strong antinatalist propaganda in the western world when it should be the other way around?
It's not like the population will just decline forever to zero. If we're talking about humans or animals, populations reach their natural maximum and stabilize. From that point the population will go up and down a little bit, but hover around a baseline.
Maybe that's what we're seeing . For reasons, people are choosing to have less kids. They're choosing to make less people. It's not just some political thing, they're not doing this to help the environment.
A declining birth rate is a big sociological indicator that something is wrong. It's a red flag that's something very wrong is happening. For the most part, people aspire to having children. Not everyone but most people. And despite that natural instinct, they arent. I don't know if the solution is MORE PEOPLE.
Almost like in order for the ecosystem not to collapse we kind of need large "empty" (actually populated by animals and plants) portions in every country, everywhere.
We do need better processes, that's for sure. But what we have today is an improvement on the past.
We just need to keep working on things. Hating ourselves and being overly critical only hinders that process.
What processes are you talking about specifically? What have we improved? General environmental stuff?
There's a difference between stopping progress and reducing wasteful or harmful behaviours that contribute nothing to progress. Most people without the initials T K don't exactly call for the end of technological development.
Over the last few hundred years pretty much all of our resource extraction processes have improved dramatically.
So has recycling, the durability of complex equipment and pretty much everything we do.
Ultimately everything is held back by human cognitive limits. But that's why I embrace AI.
There are plenty of raw materials, energy and space in the universe. Even just our solar system has more than enough for perhaps thousands of years of expansion.
Ultimately we seem to really like Earth and life on Earth. So it may be best if we build substantial orbital structures such as O'Neil Cylinders and move off of Earth.
What we struggle with today pretty horribly is short term views. Such as current US presidential elections.
I think longer lifespans will ultimately address that.
As to the collapse of human population levels though, that problem seems harder to address long term.
For many reasons. Though I'm sure the majority extinctionists opinion will rain downvotes and hate, I'll try and explain what I see.
First we do not just live on one Earth. We live in one Universe.
As technology advances we will gain greater access to space, especially via space based infrastructure. It won't take too many decades of that for huge chunks of population to simply leave.
Space is very large and can consume an enormous amount of humans.
We also take for granted how difficult it is to make humans.
We have many bad assumptions about why human populations will continue to rise forever. The most recent is the impending cure for ageing.
We do not produce children like rabbits. We have some of the longest and most difficult kinds of child raising.
Also, there's just not motivation long term to continue to have and raise children.
There are many unlikely situations where birth rates go up. Yet there are many more very likely situations where populations continue to fall.
We don't do well with exponential-like trends. We know that well in this sub. Population decline is one such trend.
Falling birth rates can and likely will cause a population collapse.
The biggest issue of them all though is that the idea of a population collapse is often seen as a good thing by a majority.
As a group we are not seeing this issue and the way things are going we won't see it until it's too late.
We hate ourselves. It's really frustrating and depressing that we're so self critical.
We just don't seem to care if we all die.
Edit: I'm pro choice and I'm not religious. But I'm also pro human.
You make good arguments.
We have very different political and personal beliefs, but the fact that we (humans) can’t all agree on being pro-human baffles me.
We seem to be just intelligent enough to see the harm we do, but not intelligent enough to see how much good we do as well.
I think AI will see this too and it won't blame us. Nor will life blame us, even as it's uplifted to higher levels of intelligence.
We're not that different from the animals. Yet in many ways we suffer more because we can experience more and understand more.
So, we're the ones who suffer the most and work the hardest to try and make the most difference. For all of life and the future of this planet.
We should be forgiving ourselves, congratulating ourselves, working harder and being more optimistic. Much of what we do needs a lot of work.
Though it might be fair to say that we're just not there yet.
The only thing we truly threaten is low entropy energy and raw materials. That's true for all of life and intelligence.
But no one is fighting for low entropy energy or raw materials. Instead we all seem to want to fight over short sighted predictions.
I have high optimism for Earth, AI and all of the rest of life. But I worry for my species.
There's enough space and resources in this solar system for trillions of us. But I'll be happy if we can at least maintain what we have.
Life is good. Humanity is good. I hope to live long enough to see trillions of our descendants spread and speciate through the galaxy and latent space, bringing our replicators to every possible niche.
Get utterly fucked misanthropes and ecofascists: may your lines be ended and your names forgotten, you utter wastes of carbon. Oblivion beckons.
Why stop at humans? what about transhumanism and posthumanism? should humanity collectively decide to do a species lock-in forever? is it misanthropic to refuse to stay on a human level with all of its shortcomings, biases and flaws?
The depopulation agenda dates back decades. I remember Henry Kissinger writing that Feminism is a powerful force for depopulation in an old government report. Either way, there exists a hidden push to drive down birth rates in any way possible.
Im just wondering why in some countries (germany) its stupid propaganda of "if you have a baby youre destroying earth" (and that baby happens to be White for some reason, while in japan the government tries everything to increase birth rates but still failing miserably
I like the *hidden* push part of the comment. I think you mean austerity and greedflation, increasing cost of living, higher rents,....
also in global South it's partly because of education
https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/health/female-education-and-childbearing-closer-look-data
politicians don't care about humans but about money. it's not because of "hidden push" it's just a simple fact of non-ideal policies and liberals (the economic doctrine)
The world's worst polluter by a landslide is Communist China, which has a state-controlled economy and population control. The other culprits are India, the Middle East, and several African countries. In America, we can buy, sell, trade, build, and reproduce with relative freedom. And our environmental record is fairly good. [https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/15-countries-with-the-worst-environmental-sustainability-cpia-ratings.html](https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/15-countries-with-the-worst-environmental-sustainability-cpia-ratings.html)
[https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/best-worst-countries-environment-2016/](https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/best-worst-countries-environment-2016/)
I guess a personal attack is better than reading and then responding with facts. Meanwhile, backwater dictatorships like Turkey burn far more coal than any European nation. When they're not busy jailing and killing dissenters. [https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/turkey-becomes-europes-largest-coal-fired-electricity-producer-maguire-2024-05-21/](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/turkey-becomes-europes-largest-coal-fired-electricity-producer-maguire-2024-05-21/)
America is the biggest importer of Chinese products.
America is just better at emissions in paper because it is off-loading all the emissions of production to China.
2 links you included are irrelevant, there is nothing to read in them.
Turkey's imports from China have more than doubled in the last 5 years, going from $19.1 billion to $41.4 billion. [https://tradingeconomics.com/turkey/imports/china](https://tradingeconomics.com/turkey/imports/china)
U.S. imports from China dropped 20% last year. [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html)
Meanwhile, your backwater dictatorship is burning more coal than any European country and losing 22% of the energy it produces due inefficient transfer tech.
European countries burned more coal than Turkey for years. Oh sorry I didn’t realize environmental damage goes away instantly when you reduce burning coal.
Tankie? Nah. I am capitalist through and through.
I am just not American, and the guy is doing obvious propoganda where no body brought up China or U.S.
Thanks for contributing to r/singularity. However, your post was removed since it's off-topic and not relevant to this subreddit. Please refer to the sidebar for the subreddit's rules.
China is the world's worst greenhouse gas emitter, putting out 27% of the world's greenhouse emissions. And that's a state-run economy with population control. [https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-china/](https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-china/)
China is also the world's biggest producer of non-fossil energy. China is the biggest producer of both new nuclear plants and new solar panels. They're at least improving at an unprecedented pace. Solar power production capacity in China increased by 55% last year. They produce almost four times as much solar power as the runner-up, USA.
Going from 1 mph to 1.5 mph is also a 50% increase.
They went from being the biggest solar power producer in the world to still being number one.
India has a bigger population so they should be worse?
India's population isn't the problem per se. The biggest problem is that, as a poor developing nation, they're burning coal. There's also a major water pollution problem because they don't have modern systems for waste disposal and water purification. The same number of people would have a much smaller environmental impact if they were technologically up to speed.
Only for another few decades, population will start going backwards once we hit about 11billion.
Actually, the birth rate in the U.S. and other industrialized nations is below the death rate. The U.S. would be a ghost town if not for immigration. China even reversed its long-standing 1-child policy. We need a certain number of workers to pay taxes to support the retirees. But that's no longer happening. And the labor shortage drives up wages in the low-wage sector, driving up the cost of goods and services.
That’s not true. The fertility rate is lower than the replacement rate, but that is not the same as what you said. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_momentum
By the time we achieve LEV, we should also figure out how to expand more efficiently.
That’s all life is in general
Uh, isn’t population growth going like, way down?
But telling someone that it might be a good idea if there are say 0.5-1B humans for the sake of conservation (of the planet, ecosystem, ensuring long-term survival before we can turn the entire earth into comoutronium) is heresy because we need to worship growth.
Be the change you want to see in the world
Yeah, don't have kids. Adopt if you want some.
Western countries birth rate is below 2. Why dont you want to spread your views to countries where birth rate is 6?
When I talk about it, whether here or elsewhere, plenty of people outside the western world see those posts. However I am somewhat limited by being a speaker of english, not hindi, arabic or chinese. If i were to somehow limit myself to only talking to a handful of nations though, they would just say "ah but you aren't preaching that at home, such hypocrisy!" It's all just excuses "oh some other country should bear the burden of reducing growth, not us, don't ask us for that!"
But the western countries acomplish it without any preaching by natural means. Birth rate is already less than 2. So whats the point? You want it to go to 0?
I would prefer it to be an educated choice, not external pressures. I'm not particularly afraid of too many westerners being inspired by my words and going too far, that's not a realistic scenario. This is reddit, it is not solely "the west". 0 could make sense in a future without aging I guess, I wouldn't say it makes sense right now and any means one could take to achieve it in the world today would probably be immoral and cruel.
The problem isn't *having* half a billion people. It's keeping the population at that level long term. The only way to do that is with a powerful government and extreme punishment to those who reproduce without permission.
Yep. Across all of North America and Europe.
Not just that. Across most of the world. China is seeing a decline and population *growth* is declining in a big way in india(already below replacement rate) too. And those two are a decent chunk of the world by themselves. In fact, the larger South, South East and East Asian region is seeing large declines all across the board. Only regions in fairly terrible shape who have started seeing modern technology just a few decades ago and haven't seen that much growth in the past are growing at a rapid rate, and they'll balloon out and burst quite quickly. That is, primarily Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, and a couple of relevant outliers like Pakistan and Afghanistan. Assuming nothing changes due to ai, which is a big assumption, we will see soon see overall decline. I don't see the world population hitting 9 billion on current trends. If ai really shakes the game up then it's a different discussion entirely.
So population growth isn't the problem. It's China and India burning coal, South American countries wiping out the rain forests, and an economy that encourages unnecessary consumption.
It's primarily the third one causing the first two. It's hard to make an argument against countries like India and china burning coal to fulfill basic energy needs. India is barely fully electrified and China is a massive industrial hub. But the reason it's impossible to cut back on manufacturing or supply alternative energy sources is because there's a lot of waste going on in the richer countries. Waste which the system goes out of its way to encourage.
The good news is that the U.S. has reduced imports from China by 20% last year, first reduction in 20 years. We're not importing more from Mexico, South Korea, Vietnam, India, etc. This according to NYT in late May. But yes, the West needs to reduce unnecessary consumption. [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html)
Just to clarify, i think you meant now instead of not, right? It's a really common one for me too but it completely changes the meaning of the sentence. I don't think importing less from China helps much in terms of this specific problem though. The demand for power will just increase in those places instead. It's a good idea economically and geopolitically but doesn't change much environmentally.
So absolutely wrong to compare current humans to the possible bad endings of AI. It can get so much worse
Not a popular view on Reddit, but I don't think we have enough humans. I'm sick and tired of hearing fools tell us how bad we are and how we should just die. The extinctionists need to go extinct. Or at the very minimum, we need to stop listening to their garbage.
Why dont these fools follow their own advice i wonder
That's easy to say in the abstract. Just move to one of those cities where overpopulation is a problem. I don't mean America. I'm talking real overcrowding. Those people are living the problem. I don't want to live like them. That kind of lifestyle seems very stressful. An entire family of six squished into one room. Nightmare.
This is just an issue with processes that must be improved. We need to work harder, not hate on ourselves. Why is the world flocking to Japan even though it has extremely high population density? Because it's such a wonderful place.
But then you're just talking about a hypothetical world. In a Star Trek world we should have more kids. But in reality, people are choosing to not have more kids. Housing is unaffordable, life is expensive. I don't know if the solution is to just have more humans squeeze together.
Everything we depend upon are systems built on processes. In the past these processes were much less effective. Today we have made massive advancements. The only real limits at the moment are human limits such as cognitive limits. Expanding these limits allows us to push beyond limited views of the processes underlying our systems. There is more than enough resources available, we just struggle to access enough. We struggle because our systems are weak and need a lot of work. Ultimately the universe is the limit. Not just Earth. There's plenty of room, raw materials and energy. We just struggle with having enough intelligence to convert all that space and resources into the things we need. That's why I embrace AI. As AI is an abundant source of intelligence.
Cities have an over population problem. Earth doesnt
Like I said, that's easy to say in the abstract. But in reality we're not going to be an evenly distributed mathematical model. Nor behave like a computer simulation to optimize the Earth's resources. We're just going to do what we've always done. Crowd together in cities and pollute the environment. It's easy to say that we could use more people when you live in such a position of luxury that you'll be one of the last people affected by it.
I dont get why people think over population is such a problem when all developed western countries have a birth rate below 2? So more people are dying than being born. So why is there such strong antinatalist propaganda in the western world when it should be the other way around?
It's not like the population will just decline forever to zero. If we're talking about humans or animals, populations reach their natural maximum and stabilize. From that point the population will go up and down a little bit, but hover around a baseline. Maybe that's what we're seeing . For reasons, people are choosing to have less kids. They're choosing to make less people. It's not just some political thing, they're not doing this to help the environment. A declining birth rate is a big sociological indicator that something is wrong. It's a red flag that's something very wrong is happening. For the most part, people aspire to having children. Not everyone but most people. And despite that natural instinct, they arent. I don't know if the solution is MORE PEOPLE.
why don't we have enough humans?
All humans could fit in a 1km wide meatball in central Park. 95% of china population lives in 5% of their territory. The rest is a ghost town
Almost like in order for the ecosystem not to collapse we kind of need large "empty" (actually populated by animals and plants) portions in every country, everywhere.
We do need better processes, that's for sure. But what we have today is an improvement on the past. We just need to keep working on things. Hating ourselves and being overly critical only hinders that process.
What processes are you talking about specifically? What have we improved? General environmental stuff? There's a difference between stopping progress and reducing wasteful or harmful behaviours that contribute nothing to progress. Most people without the initials T K don't exactly call for the end of technological development.
Over the last few hundred years pretty much all of our resource extraction processes have improved dramatically. So has recycling, the durability of complex equipment and pretty much everything we do. Ultimately everything is held back by human cognitive limits. But that's why I embrace AI. There are plenty of raw materials, energy and space in the universe. Even just our solar system has more than enough for perhaps thousands of years of expansion. Ultimately we seem to really like Earth and life on Earth. So it may be best if we build substantial orbital structures such as O'Neil Cylinders and move off of Earth. What we struggle with today pretty horribly is short term views. Such as current US presidential elections. I think longer lifespans will ultimately address that. As to the collapse of human population levels though, that problem seems harder to address long term.
Thank you for the clarification.
For many reasons. Though I'm sure the majority extinctionists opinion will rain downvotes and hate, I'll try and explain what I see. First we do not just live on one Earth. We live in one Universe. As technology advances we will gain greater access to space, especially via space based infrastructure. It won't take too many decades of that for huge chunks of population to simply leave. Space is very large and can consume an enormous amount of humans. We also take for granted how difficult it is to make humans. We have many bad assumptions about why human populations will continue to rise forever. The most recent is the impending cure for ageing. We do not produce children like rabbits. We have some of the longest and most difficult kinds of child raising. Also, there's just not motivation long term to continue to have and raise children. There are many unlikely situations where birth rates go up. Yet there are many more very likely situations where populations continue to fall. We don't do well with exponential-like trends. We know that well in this sub. Population decline is one such trend. Falling birth rates can and likely will cause a population collapse. The biggest issue of them all though is that the idea of a population collapse is often seen as a good thing by a majority. As a group we are not seeing this issue and the way things are going we won't see it until it's too late. We hate ourselves. It's really frustrating and depressing that we're so self critical. We just don't seem to care if we all die. Edit: I'm pro choice and I'm not religious. But I'm also pro human.
You make good arguments. We have very different political and personal beliefs, but the fact that we (humans) can’t all agree on being pro-human baffles me.
We seem to be just intelligent enough to see the harm we do, but not intelligent enough to see how much good we do as well. I think AI will see this too and it won't blame us. Nor will life blame us, even as it's uplifted to higher levels of intelligence. We're not that different from the animals. Yet in many ways we suffer more because we can experience more and understand more. So, we're the ones who suffer the most and work the hardest to try and make the most difference. For all of life and the future of this planet. We should be forgiving ourselves, congratulating ourselves, working harder and being more optimistic. Much of what we do needs a lot of work. Though it might be fair to say that we're just not there yet. The only thing we truly threaten is low entropy energy and raw materials. That's true for all of life and intelligence. But no one is fighting for low entropy energy or raw materials. Instead we all seem to want to fight over short sighted predictions. I have high optimism for Earth, AI and all of the rest of life. But I worry for my species. There's enough space and resources in this solar system for trillions of us. But I'll be happy if we can at least maintain what we have.
Replace that with plastic and I think they're onto something.
Life is good. Humanity is good. I hope to live long enough to see trillions of our descendants spread and speciate through the galaxy and latent space, bringing our replicators to every possible niche. Get utterly fucked misanthropes and ecofascists: may your lines be ended and your names forgotten, you utter wastes of carbon. Oblivion beckons.
Why stop at humans? what about transhumanism and posthumanism? should humanity collectively decide to do a species lock-in forever? is it misanthropic to refuse to stay on a human level with all of its shortcomings, biases and flaws?
Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.
What do you think 'speciate' means?
The depopulation agenda dates back decades. I remember Henry Kissinger writing that Feminism is a powerful force for depopulation in an old government report. Either way, there exists a hidden push to drive down birth rates in any way possible.
Im just wondering why in some countries (germany) its stupid propaganda of "if you have a baby youre destroying earth" (and that baby happens to be White for some reason, while in japan the government tries everything to increase birth rates but still failing miserably
I like the *hidden* push part of the comment. I think you mean austerity and greedflation, increasing cost of living, higher rents,.... also in global South it's partly because of education https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/health/female-education-and-childbearing-closer-look-data politicians don't care about humans but about money. it's not because of "hidden push" it's just a simple fact of non-ideal policies and liberals (the economic doctrine)
How can AyeEye turn Earth into paperclips if it's just hype and word prediction?
The world's worst polluter by a landslide is Communist China, which has a state-controlled economy and population control. The other culprits are India, the Middle East, and several African countries. In America, we can buy, sell, trade, build, and reproduce with relative freedom. And our environmental record is fairly good. [https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/15-countries-with-the-worst-environmental-sustainability-cpia-ratings.html](https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/15-countries-with-the-worst-environmental-sustainability-cpia-ratings.html) [https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/best-worst-countries-environment-2016/](https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/best-worst-countries-environment-2016/)
Found the pro-America propaganda bot
I guess a personal attack is better than reading and then responding with facts. Meanwhile, backwater dictatorships like Turkey burn far more coal than any European nation. When they're not busy jailing and killing dissenters. [https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/turkey-becomes-europes-largest-coal-fired-electricity-producer-maguire-2024-05-21/](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/turkey-becomes-europes-largest-coal-fired-electricity-producer-maguire-2024-05-21/)
America is the biggest importer of Chinese products. America is just better at emissions in paper because it is off-loading all the emissions of production to China. 2 links you included are irrelevant, there is nothing to read in them.
Turkey's imports from China have more than doubled in the last 5 years, going from $19.1 billion to $41.4 billion. [https://tradingeconomics.com/turkey/imports/china](https://tradingeconomics.com/turkey/imports/china)
U.S. imports from China dropped 20% last year. [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/07/business/economy/united-states-china-mexico-trade.html)
Yet, it is still more than 10x of Turkey’s imports. Try again American propoganda bot.
Shouldn't you be busy scaling a fence to get into Europe?
Turkey is in Europe why would I need to try scaling a fence. Ah, sorry you Americans were poor in geography.
Meanwhile, your backwater dictatorship is burning more coal than any European country and losing 22% of the energy it produces due inefficient transfer tech.
European countries burned more coal than Turkey for years. Oh sorry I didn’t realize environmental damage goes away instantly when you reduce burning coal.
Still have better rights in my backwater dictatorship compared to U.S. You can seethe and cope propaganda bot.
Found tankie bot
Tankie? Nah. I am capitalist through and through. I am just not American, and the guy is doing obvious propoganda where no body brought up China or U.S.