shadowfly

@shadowfly@feddit.de

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

Do we need to create increasingly more children for a stable economy?

So in the whole anti-natalism/pro-natalism conversation (which I'm mostly agnostic/undecided on, currently), my friend who is a pro-natalist, argued that the success/stability of our world economy is dependent on procreating more children each year than the previous year, so that we not only replace the numbers of the people who...

shadowfly ,
  1. So in the beginning there were people. And those people had problems (need for food, shelter,...).
  2. So to fix these problems more efficiently (but far from completely), people invented economies.
  3. But now these economies require infinite population growth (i doubt that's actually true).
  4. Therefore people make more people to sustain the economy. These new people themselves have needs, which did not exist before.
  5. So these new people now also need to make even more people to sustain the economy.
  6. Repeat.

So the economy actually amplifies suffering (exponentially), not reduce it.

Also, like others have pointed out: Many economies before industrial agriculture had basically 0 growth, and sustained themselves for centuries.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •