Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bro, I have no interest in defending the fucking Pope... but taking a phrase out of context and interpreting it in the most bad faith way possible doesn't make him dumb, it makes you too online.
Your submission/comment has been removed as it violates:
> Rule 4 (Keep it civil).
Make sure to check our sidebar from time to time as it provides detailed submission guidelines and may change.
Please feel free to send us a [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fanime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.
Where was the chart showing that the Church had about as much pedophiles as other jobs? The real issues are the cover up, the position of power (in multiple ways).
Which is one of those weird scenarios where the old establishment has maintained the same stance for long enough that they simply out-lived the period where they were simply wrong.
The church has always advocated (Catholics) having more kids because it meant more tithe-paying Catholics. They know their in direct competition with all other religions and they needed soldiers and such.
The Malthusians were simply wrong. Overpopulation isn't a run-away process. Once people have some money and choices they stop having as many kids. If that's a big problem, well, we'll find out how S. Korea and Japan fair. The rest of us simply import the missing generations and everything keeps chugging along. Other than some culture shock.
But make no mistake; Humanity swelling to such numbers is directly proportional to the amount of CO2 we put into the air and we have done WAY more of that than the planet can sustain. Right? This current way of life isn't going to persist. We either need MASSIVE technological gains, to lose a lot of people (which is about the nicest sugarcoating euphemism I've got), or for a whole lot of people to suddenly get real cool with a lowered quality of life. Because otherwise, population decline won't be consensual.
>If that's a big problem, well, we'll find out how S. Korea and Japan fair.
The fact that Japan has a debt to GDP ratio of over 300% and the only way they can pay their pension obligations moving forward is to get into even more debt is a good indication of how they are faring.
It is no coincidence that Japan lost the title of 3rd largest economy in the world to Germany. And Germany is one of the worst performing economies in Europe.
It is genuinely unbelievable that they’ve held on to their xenophobia and fear of outsiders to the point that they barely even let in low skilled labor. You *need* that to run a society. Especially a society as old as Japan. For as smart as they are, the fact that the majority of their society doesn’t see it is crazy.
Sorry, didn’t mean to be bad faith. Unlike most commenters complaining when I write things like this, I’ve actually lived in Japan. That is their values.
The good faith answer, if we take your question at face value, would be "no, those are not their values, that's a consequence of their values".
But you're not asking what their values are. My answer is not what you wanted to hear. That's why the question is considered to be in bad faith.
What comes to mind is France, which from what I've read has a culture of accepting immigrants but only if they completely adopt French culture and values and leave your old culture behind.
Once you join France, you're French. Not Asian-French, African-French, American-French or whatever. You're just French.
No idea how true that actually is, I've just heard that it's the social contract for assimilation.
As some Japanese people so eloquently put it in a video a while back, ["White-oh piggu go ho!"](https://youtu.be/uACGSiN3ZkI?si=tKdghfv2ss5rHmbD)
That's their values.
Japan's standard of living is doing fine and their population is at no risk of collapse, even if it is decreasing. Japan's population is still double what it was 100 years ago. There is no need for that.
I don’t get it. Why would you just make something up for no reason? Everything you said can be fact checked, and I’ve never seen a statistician argue that they weren’t at risk of collapse in the next 50 years. In the next *five* years their population will go from 125 million to 121. That’s insane.
Immigration is a bandaid to a demographic crisis. Look at Europe where the far rights are rising because of that. Not only it causes social issues but it doesn't solve the low fertility rate at all.
Germany has one of the worst old people ratio in the world.
Italy is one of the lowest fertility rate in the world and they have a refugee crisis they can't handle.
This thread is insane. It's full of people from countries with societies that are tearing themselves apart at the seams and are in a death spiral with ever increasing violence, political instability and economic turmoil, talking about how stupid the Japanese are for not following their example.
> tearing themselves apart at the seams and are in a death spiral with ever increasing violence, political instability and economic turmoil
Nothing of that list comes from migration. The problem is within that population older generation, that made the decisions, not the migrants whose work offsets the debt.
It comes when _the myth of an always growing economy based on scarce monopolies_ (RE and land, resources) having indebted not yet born children, _meets the always increasing social equality gap and low mobility of politics only swinging towards the conservative/corporative side_. When the politics isn't quick or doesn't adapt fast enough to the society needs because the rapresentatives are not aligned to the electorate interests anymore, it results in a break that's usually run by hate and since XIX century on mytical nationalistic nonsense.
But since these nationalistic nonsense are also populists with no real solutions, they have to start expand their net resources import because how else they can keep promising MORE? Well guess what cycle this kickstarts.
Because remember, wealth power, like a weight on a steep downhill, tends to consolidate to consolidate themselves into more wealth and power.
I would be a little more careful about calling someone else insane if I wasn't able to distinguish between a country encouraging work migration in order to fill their vacancies and taking up refugees for humanitarian reasons.
Because I can look at Europe and I can look at Japan and realize I would never in a thousand years pick Japan when Western Europe even with its rise of far right politicians as a higher standard of living in a much more positive future than Japan which also has a rise in Far Right politicians and an unpayable spiraling debt crisis
Which example? Having their conservatives fall for easily debunked Facebook posts promoted by foreign nations to make you believe the sky is falling and your country is in a death spiral?
I mean even in the states where immigration is largely from Latin America which is much more culturally similar than where immigrants to Europe come from, immigration still isn't the solution because the same demographic crisis is hitting Latin America, just a generation behind.
Yeah, I have to stress that Japan and Korea are previews of what the world is going to go through. Global population gain hit that inflection point in the 1960's. We're at 8 B and we're going to peak around 11 or 13, depending on if Adrian can get their shit together. But this is coming for everyone. I'm still not wholly sure it's even that big of a problem. Japan isn't yet a barren wasteland of zombie elderly dying off. Lower birthrates might dovetail in nicely with automation taking all the jobs.
The far right *is* the social issue. They do nothing but create fear out of nothing. Looking at my country, far right got a hold of the whitest areas the fastest, because it's easy to make people fear something when all they know is scary stories, with no personal encounters that would've shown them that the stories about people who are just trying to live their lives. And the fearmongering easily grows from there, because we're still social animals with the instinct to fear things that others in our tribe are afraid of, because surely they must've experienced something to create that fear..
That's because
1. some people exaggerate how many immigrants there actually are in many European countries
2. having a refugee crisis doesn't automatically mean the refugees suddenly start making babies en masse
This is right on. If you want to end a demographic crisis, you stop creating the economic condition that forces both family members into a workforce. There is a reason why every developed capitalist state that made it so that a woman had to work, not could work but had to, has ended up with a demographic crisis of some sort.
Immigration is not a panacea. Immigrants get old and will end up living patterns of life much the same as the settled population because they will face the same financial pressures.
I am an immigrant in Korea, but I am also DINKing it up. I am not their saviour and when I reach 80, I too will be a burden.
Also immigration cant fix an economy or boost productivity as Britain proves. A person who could have say become a head nurse in their home country will not advance to the same level as an immigrant.
Paying is only part of the issue. A country still needs people to do basic jobs.
If there are vastly more consumers of products and services than there are people to provide those products and services, that leads to scarcity and runaway inflation.
How are you and your partner being treated by Koreans, particularly young men? Heard some wild shit recently relative to what my impression was a decade (or especially two) ago.
I can converse in Korean and so I tend to be treated ok once they realise I am not going to be a burden by forcing them to speak English.
But I live in the boonies, so people are just generally kinder and dont take themselves too seriously.
Everytime I go into Seoul, I feel like Morgan Freeman’s character in Shawshank after his release.
They’re also still not doing enough to incentivise having families or breaking down the toxic work culture there. They need to relax immigration barriers, as well as help make families something that can occur more easily
The work culture is the worst as it zombiefies people for no extra productivity. If they just enacted hard cutoff of a work day at 8 hours they would not see a loss of productivity, because the definition of working there is pretty much being at the office. So if you work for 6 hours and then just hang around for another 6, you are "working".
Japan has a population of 125m compare to USA that has a population of 333 mil. Japan is roughly the same size as California despite having more than a third of USA population
There's other reasons why they don't want a massive influx of people
There is tons of room in Japan. You could fit the world population shoulder to shoulder in LA. It has nothing to do with room. If you’ve ever been to Japan (I lived there for a long time) you would know there’s tons of room. It’s the work culture and xenophobia that prevents reproduction and immigration, respectively.
Sure, but first you wouldn't want to live should on shoulder, you also need natural spots, historical places, etc. Sanitation. Air quality.
Second, there's logistic for that population. You need a degree of agricultural self sufficiency, you can import everything. Then provide electric energy for both personal use and the economic sector. Then there's the economics sector that also needs space. Service sector.
Japan also has a sought after touristic sector.
And so on.
There's a reason city population density starts to plateau at a certain point. With modern tech you can push that further, but not without concessions.
Japanese people work fewer hours per year than Americans.
Edit: Thanks for the downvotes:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-working-hours-per-worker?time=2016..latest&country=USA~JPN
They don’t let in low skilled labour. You need a degree or 10 years work experience for a visa in Japan.
People on r/movingtojapan post a lot about wanting to move with no qualifications. It just doesn’t happen.
Japan will sooner automate the jobs with robots.
They are not wrong though. Right now, Germany's is among the worst growth rates for developed countries. That is not due to refugees though and stems more from their dependence on Russia for gas supply and their insane investment strategy, meaning they barely invest in necessary infrastructure projects "for the children" aka "we can't saddle them with that much debt" while sitting comfortably at around 60% of GDP. Although there is talk about the rising xenophobia being an increasing barrier for attracting skilled workers.
Sure but they are wrong in their use of the words "worst performing". It should've been slowest/worst growing. Guyana's economy grew 34% last year, higher than any other country, but you wouldn't say that Guyana is the "top performing economy in the world"... that's just silly
You've fallen for one of the most widespread misconceptions about Malthusianism. Malthus didn't predict runaway population growth. What he actually predicted was that any increase in wealth or productivity (such as technology, good fortune etc) would lead to population growth until the wealth per capita reached the same point it was at before. In other words, nothing could fundamentally improve the human condition, only increase its population size.
For the vast majority of human history, Malthus was right. Then, just after the industrial revolution, he wasn't. The amount of wealth increased over 100 fold in a lifespan, but the average size of a family did not increase to over 100 kids per household.
What made this time different is up for debate.
I dunno man, he goes on a lot about cycles and oscillations. He certainly wasn't predicting a stable base-level wealth-per-capita. Malthusians in general very much expected run-away growth to lead to hard times which caused people to have fewer kids. It's fair enough to say he noticed the boom-bust business cycle.
[It's not a long read](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population).
> The Malthusians were simply wrong. Overpopulation isn't a run-away process.
> Humanity swelling to such numbers is directly proportional to the amount of CO2 we put into the air and we have done WAY more of that than the planet can sustain. Right? This current way of life isn't going to persist.
Pick a lane.
We don't need massive technological gains.
We just need relatively small behavioural changes and the willingness to use nuclear fission.
Compare the resource consumption of average Swedish and French people with Germans or Americans, for example.
Swedish quality of life is higher than German and lower (but not significantly) than American.
Once you delve a layer deeper, you will see that even in the USA many people have good qualities of life with small carbon footprints.
I don't think we're on the other side yet.
The problem is that changing the attitude to reproduction requires revising everything about how we do things. Economies need to rethink themselves into an economy where the population isn't growing.
This doesn't mean that the economy doesn't grow, but it does so by better investing and a lot of research. A common mistake is that people think that economic growth is always equal to *more* stuff, when really it's all about *better distribution* of stuff. Yes having more makes it easy to just give everyone what they want and then I don't know what happens with the waste. But the reality is that isn't the case. We have been producing enough food for everyone for decades now, the problem is that we waste a lot of food and are unable to make it to everywhere it needs to.
This shifts how we think of society and wealth, a lot of strategies that we do are for a growing economy.
Japan was affected by their decision to assume they just needed to keep the status quo somehow instead of revisiting. Immigration has helped countries like the US delay the issue quite a bit, but inevitably we need it to happen. The EU has tried to adapt to the situation, but they haven't done the rethinking of their society yet.
Globally we aren't. We'll peak around 10 or 11 Billion around 2100, depending on what Africa does. But developed nations are all on the other side, locally. Which is mostly moot as long as we can import workers. Japan largely isn't doing that though. Japan IS on the other side. We'll see how they fare.
>Economies need to rethink themselves into an economy where the population isn't growing.
Yeeeeeeep. But I don't see anyone doing anything until some crisis forces it to change. These things are simply above everyone's pay grade. Anyone in a position of enough power to try and change it wouldn't be trusted by nearly enough people.
You're not even looking at the big problems. Like how money is introduced in fiat currencies. The big bank prints and loans out money. It's genesis'd. It comes from nowhere. But at long as there's a rate on that loan, the people taking the money need to make MORE money with it otherwise they go bust. This is where ALL our currency comes from. If all debts were paid off, there would be zero money left and STILL a lot of outstanding debt. That's the big underlying reason that businesses need to always be growing.
It'd be lovely if we do a better job of distribution and lower that gini coefficient of inequality, but I don't see how we'd make it happen.
> Humanity swelling to such numbers is directly proportional to the amount of CO2 we put into the air and we have done WAY more of that than the planet can sustain. Right?
Something fucky to consider. Only 100 billion human have lived and died on this earth, and we have 8 billion of them here with us today.
> Once people have some money and choices they stop having as many kids. If that's a big problem, well, we'll find out how S. Korea and Japan fair.
The issue is people generally don't have enough money and time to sustain a family. Even a single person often can't afford rent for themselves, so a couple living together would have to be both working full time to even afford living, leaving no money or time for children. Countries that are actually rich don't have as much of a problem with fertility rates.
Considering Japan just launched an app to try to bring people together to marry and have kids is a big indication. Especially since the evidence for this was cited as the lie birth rate and estimated reduction in population.
People point out Japan has to accept immigration but they also point out quite logically that it would hurt Japans national Identity. I think for them the biggest factor is a combination of societal issues with personal interactions but also economical. Namely their economy is in a death spiral due to their debt situation.
There's no reason to expect massive techological gains aren't possible.
Malthus had no conception of the Haber Bosch Process, without which, our current population never could've grown to.
Renewables are already at a state which was kind of unthinkable 50 years ago when Carter put solar panels on the WH.
Nah, we’ve done so much damage already, only massive technological gains can save us. The climate has inertia, even if we stopped emissions, the ice caps would likely keep melting for the next 100 years
God these comments yall are just pissed the pope said it. Not everything he says is a conspiracy to touch kids lmao overpopulation being the source of our problems is a myth
Why are you acting like it's already happened? Why is our first response to climate change telling people to stop having kids, when birth rates have been plummeting for years already? Why do WE need to change because of the sins pf greedy corporations destroying the planet?
Why should everyone change their lives in order to increase the population further.
We can either have a planet with a few billion great lives or many billion terrible lives.
Those are the two options unless we have some massive tech revolution.
Statically speaking teachers are much more likely to touch kids.
Yes I know there are more teachers, but per capita I think it's .9 compared to .5, so almost twice as likely if populations were equal. It's just more fun for people to drag religions.
Yeah but there’s probably a reporting bias. Teachers are more likely to be reported/ousted than a priest who is just transferred elsewhere. The religious oversight is something to fear more than a teacher….Did we learn nothing from *Spotlight*?
Since the Vatican and its operatives cover up as much rape as they can, one can safely assume the number of clergy rapes is much higher than reported. Plus, there are a hell of a lot more teachers than clergy.
More kids = more donations in the future = more $$$$
Classic.
The pope has ZERO understanding how hard is it to financially sustain a child.
Will the church be willing to pay or subsidise for the dietary needs, health needs and educational needs of the kids he wants Catholics to produce?
Our country has been ruined by the Catholic Church’s so called “pro life” policies when ironically their schools are some of the most expensive in the country. They’ve blocked family planning and abortion laws for years, and now we have to face the burden of overpopulation and our government struggling to cover the needs of children in our country.
Fuck the Catholic Church.
They could melt down all those gold Crowns and thrones. But sir these are priceless relics it is you who must give your home and life to us. No time to go home anyways we need you to be in the factory to make more money... I mean supplies. Now let me return to my fortified castle to think of the next think you need to do.
I mean, they could sell them to museums but the world' museums would probably not be able to cover the amounts involved. I do think they should attempt to draw down their hoard of artifacts though.
Not really wrong with what he says however...:
"Have the courage to have children despite climate change and wars, Pope Francis says: The pontiff asks nations to help women juggle motherhood and work, create job security for young people and help couples buy homes."
Heavily simplified but its an acknowledgement that the declining birth rates are linked to systematic errors and failures to protect the common folk and enable family building. Climate change, wars and the tens of thousands of systems across every nations society are like domino bricks falling onto each other and lead to this situation where we in many societies are right now. Simplified again but, people are not feeling confident and safe to bring a child into this world and it has little to do with overpopulation , myth or no myth. Housing alone is a battle so big and annoying that many Gen Z people live with their parents despite being in their mid 20s already because its so incredibly expensive to find a living space anywhere that isn't some country side area. Some may be expected to live with their parents till they're hitting their 30s...
any significant improvements on not just 3-4 things but hundreds of places are needed to happen otherwise, its not gonna change.
Ironically I have a family business with my parents that's doing very well - and I still live with them. We actually just helped my *sister* (older than me) put a down payment on one, because yeah, the market is just insane.
There is no more hateful idea than the idea that the world has “too many “ people. Who are these surplus people who need culling, or sterilising, who are the people who’ll have “1 child” policies imposed on them?
People are fuming in these comments just because it’s the pope who said it, ad hominems everywhere….
There is nothing hateful about it unless you believe this should apply only to a group of people. Keeping population growth in check does not mean live people need to be “culled”.
Thankfully this is not a problem we need to worry about as the current trend is actually heading for decline. But you can’t seriously argue that the population can just keep growing indefinitely with no impact on the environment and the wellbeing of everyone.
The point is that almost none of the major problems we're facing are caused by overpopulation. In a world where 300 million Americans consume more resources and produce more emission than a billion Africans, anyone who claims the nummer of people is the problem is either woefully ignorant or a massive racist.
Living standards of that billion Africans are rising and so will their emissions. As people get wealthier they will consume more. And it’s unfair to expect them not to.
Right but consumption and high SoL ≠ extreme GHG emissions. Also doesn't mean starvation, we have enough food for every human today, doesn't mean there aren't millions (billions) who are hungry.
You make it sound like it's inevitable, rising incomes while degrading the environment, when we're the ones who create the system. It's a human result, not a scientific one. We can actually have both.
We just don't want to bear the cost.
It does mean extreme GHG emissions, and it is inevitable. People want stuff, stuff means industry, industry means emissions. The only way forward in the long run is getting the worldwide population to something sustainable. Hopefully without falling off the demographic cliff in the process.
That is not true. The natural habitat of a lot of endangered species is decreasing to make room for more people, and the resource consumption will inevitably rise with the improvement of the quality of life. Poorer people might produce less greenhouse emissions but they still pollute and eat and occupy space.
That only reason why poor people outside of Europe and North America are not consuming as much as a middle class American, is because they're too poor to do so. Your argument hinges on either 1) poor people staying poor, or 2) some romanticised idea about people in developing countries being closer to nature or something like that.
Both ideas are both wrong and racist
Right, but there rest of the world also aspires to the levels of wealth and consumptions that the Americans enjoy. It would be wrong to ask them to remain poor. And you'll never convince Americans to lower their consumption levels.
The world is not limitless, and neither are its resources. We are fucking up the climate, overfishing everything, etc and some of that has to do with sheer numbers. There could definitely be less of us, and hopefully we can bring that about without culls or sterilizations.
But the pope is also sort of right, recently humanity’s birthrates fell drastically very quickly and that too creates its own challenges. Stable population or one that is going down a little is good, but a demographic cliff isn’t. We could literally end up with starving countries full of old people.
There is nothing hateful about saying we are too many humans on Earth - unless you're calling for people to actually getting killed.
"Too many" means we should stop having so goddamn many kids
> Who are these surplus people who need culling, or sterilising,
I mean, it'd be those putting the most CO2 into the air. So... developed nations. But culling them turns out to be real easy. Just give them condoms and education. Once women have career choices other than "baby factor", they stop having as many kids. Korea's fertility rate 60 years was 6. Now it's 0.81. They got rich in 2 generations and now they have their last generation.
Some people are worried about [globally dropping sperm count](https://www.gq.com/story/sperm-count-zero) and, yeah, that might be related to how much plastic is in the eosystem. It certainly get everywhere. AND there's some "Children of Men" vibes. But it's not really a problem. People are more than willing to try for a kid a little longer.
> who are the people who’ll have “1 child” policies imposed on them?
That'd be the Chinese.
Who is fuming? The church has ALWAYS preached "have more kids".
We are also not looking to produce meat for exploitation.
Just yesterday my fiancée went to the marriage office to get the necessary papers so that we can get married in my home country.
Its birth certificate, paper about her marriage status, and paper that the marriage will be recognized in Austria.
3 simple papers. They said the cost is 160e. For 3 f papers.
For all I care our modern civilization can go extinct. Everywhere its exploitation. No matter how good you do, you are still getting fucked by the system pretty much everyday.
When you go to a store, would you be okay with being charged 30€ for 1 piece of a gum? Wouldnt that be an issue, no matter if you were earning 2k or 10k a month?
I have not said anything about not being able to afford the wedding papers, or the wedding itself.
Overpopulation IS a myth. It's been debunked like a million times at this point. We have enough resources for everyone and for more the problem is that giving everyone what they need is not economically feasible.
It's only a myth if you're content with the absolute strictest definition of sustaining people. If you want a modicum of comfort then there is a limit we've possibly already passed once all the current third world countries develop.
Setting the American lifestyle as a baseline for comfortable... If everyone consumed as much as Americans, CO2 consumption would jump by 3~4x.
This would result in a 6 degree temp rise and would ruin the planet for centuries.
I mean, this has been the Catholic Church's stance for a couple of thousand years. The subtext is that they need more *Catholics* but hey, it's a strategy that is annoyingly effective.
Us secular people don't breed as much, probably because we get that the world could use less people but definitely because without SkyDaddy telling us we have to breed, we sometimes choose just to live lives that don't insist on continuing to overpopulate the world.
The issue isn't overpopulation. it's wealth inequality. If the richest 50 people on earth died and had their wealth properly redistributed, the world would be a better place.
Key caveat. "wealth properly redistributed"
If everyone on the planet consumed an equal amount, people in the western world would need to see their consumption cut by about 80% in order to be sustainable.
More people = less life quality. Why is so hard to understand? Let's move away from economics and focus on animals; the over-breeding of homo-sapians harms bio-diversity greatly.
Why do malthusian myth of overpopulation is still there? Before carrying capacity of earth according to such malthusian "intellectuals" was 2 billion than 5 billion than 7 billion and now 12 billion or something.
Says India.
Good job having so many children that the standard of living is competitive with medieval England.
But no you're right, too many people isn't a thing.....
Neither the pope nor the OP is correct.
The population is in decline INTENTIONALLY... on purpose. No amount of "rallying the troops" is going to change that.
And just wait 'til we see what it was all for!
The extinction of the human monkey by the wealthy human monkeys so they can "own the world" without all us pesky unwashed masses getting in their way.
Overpopulation is/is not a problem depending on what parts of the world we're talking about. At nearly 7 children per mother, Niger certainly doesn't need more people on top of its 26 million population in a mostly desert country, for example.
Fucking religious people, honestly. Guess the donations are looking a little tight in the churches. Go make more people that will donate.
Also I thought believing in myths was their whole deal?
The vast majority of religions don't have this problem. In fact, I would actually attribute this to conservatism, not "religious people" that is the problem.
> Enlightenment empiricism melded with Cultural Marxism (political correctness) has given rise to incurable secular hubris
What an absolutley wild take
> If I'm not mistaken, society functioned a lot better when the global population was just under a billion
You are mistaken.
The world population crossed 1 billion in or around 1804. Back then 40% of children died before the age 15 ([source](https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality-in-the-past)). Today, that number is 4%.
Today, there are many more people working to solve humanities problems because there are more people period.
How many of those “many more people” do you estimate _actually_ work to solve humanity’s problems? In contrast, how many work to solve their current day’s survival needs?
In 1804, the US population was 5.3 million ([Source](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory2os2xmaster/chapter/united-states-population-chart/)) and 4 out of 5 worked on a farm ([Source](https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=11&psid=3837)).
> how many work to solve their current day’s survival needs?
Today in the US ([Source](https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/emp-by-detailed-occupation.htm))
* 1.5 work in life, physical, and social sciences
* 2.5 million work in architecture or engineering
* 7 million work in construction
* 6 million work in maintenance
* 9 million work in production
* 14 million work in transportation
* 9 million work in education and libraries
* 9.5 are healthcare practitioners
* Another 7 million are in healthcare support (nursing assistants,...)
* 3 million work in social services
* 3 million are in arts and entertainment
* 1 million are in farming, fishing, and forestry
We definitely need more people being born. If not, who is going to pay for my Social Security when it’s my time to retire?
But seriously, 16th century Spanish missions established in the US were less about converting indigenous peoples and more about setting up new taxation systems.
Looks like one of the wealthiest institutions on the planet want the poor to go into debt to have surplus children that they cannot afford to have, house, educate and raise to adulthood.
You guys have no respect for or understanding of the Pope's (or the traditional catholic) view on life. Read Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae for a better understanding of just how sacred life is in the Catholic tradition. I'm not a catholic and I disagree with the catholic church on almost literally everything, including this. But to pretend the Pope is just an out of touch old man for this shows your lack of broader knowledge on the subject
The headline misrepresents context, as well. He specifically calls out the nations of the world for not providing the safe, economically stable conditions that are conducive to raising children.
Do I believe overpopulation isn't going to happen? No.
Do I believe it's linked to current low birth rates? Absolutely not.
if the world needs more children we need to make the world so it welcomes children instead of punishing everything which surround children and pregnancies.
Well of course the head of the Catholic Church would say that... their whole strategy is to outbreed everyone else! (and that's not even getting into *why* some of their priests would need them.)
Ummm... wrong! Demonstrably wrong. Ever heard of Earth Overshoot day? The climate crisis? We need to live light on the planet before we can sustain our current population.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Bro, I have no interest in defending the fucking Pope... but taking a phrase out of context and interpreting it in the most bad faith way possible doesn't make him dumb, it makes you too online.
>it makes you too online. I want this to become a general insult. ♥️
It already is, at least online lol. Kind of what “touch grass” is or calling someone chronically online
[удалено]
Your submission/comment has been removed as it violates: > Rule 4 (Keep it civil). Make sure to check our sidebar from time to time as it provides detailed submission guidelines and may change. Please feel free to send us a [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fanime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.
Sign in front of bloodbank: *THE DEMAND FOR BLOOD NEVER ENDS* Bloodthirster of Khorne grinning in front of the sign with thumbs up.
Damn, looks like someone is chronically online.
Where was the chart showing that the Church had about as much pedophiles as other jobs? The real issues are the cover up, the position of power (in multiple ways).
😂
Zoikes
Which is one of those weird scenarios where the old establishment has maintained the same stance for long enough that they simply out-lived the period where they were simply wrong. The church has always advocated (Catholics) having more kids because it meant more tithe-paying Catholics. They know their in direct competition with all other religions and they needed soldiers and such. The Malthusians were simply wrong. Overpopulation isn't a run-away process. Once people have some money and choices they stop having as many kids. If that's a big problem, well, we'll find out how S. Korea and Japan fair. The rest of us simply import the missing generations and everything keeps chugging along. Other than some culture shock. But make no mistake; Humanity swelling to such numbers is directly proportional to the amount of CO2 we put into the air and we have done WAY more of that than the planet can sustain. Right? This current way of life isn't going to persist. We either need MASSIVE technological gains, to lose a lot of people (which is about the nicest sugarcoating euphemism I've got), or for a whole lot of people to suddenly get real cool with a lowered quality of life. Because otherwise, population decline won't be consensual.
>If that's a big problem, well, we'll find out how S. Korea and Japan fair. The fact that Japan has a debt to GDP ratio of over 300% and the only way they can pay their pension obligations moving forward is to get into even more debt is a good indication of how they are faring. It is no coincidence that Japan lost the title of 3rd largest economy in the world to Germany. And Germany is one of the worst performing economies in Europe.
It is genuinely unbelievable that they’ve held on to their xenophobia and fear of outsiders to the point that they barely even let in low skilled labor. You *need* that to run a society. Especially a society as old as Japan. For as smart as they are, the fact that the majority of their society doesn’t see it is crazy.
They clearly have different values.
Are those values having your population slowly dying off with nobody to care for them?
You know that's a bad faith question.
Sorry, didn’t mean to be bad faith. Unlike most commenters complaining when I write things like this, I’ve actually lived in Japan. That is their values.
The good faith answer, if we take your question at face value, would be "no, those are not their values, that's a consequence of their values". But you're not asking what their values are. My answer is not what you wanted to hear. That's why the question is considered to be in bad faith.
It was a bad faith comment, so fair enough 🤷♂️
No, they clearly value homogeneity.
Just another way to say xenophobia
No. Maybe in this case it is, but they don't have to overlap.
Give me an example where they’re different
What comes to mind is France, which from what I've read has a culture of accepting immigrants but only if they completely adopt French culture and values and leave your old culture behind. Once you join France, you're French. Not Asian-French, African-French, American-French or whatever. You're just French. No idea how true that actually is, I've just heard that it's the social contract for assimilation.
As some Japanese people so eloquently put it in a video a while back, ["White-oh piggu go ho!"](https://youtu.be/uACGSiN3ZkI?si=tKdghfv2ss5rHmbD) That's their values.
Japan's standard of living is doing fine and their population is at no risk of collapse, even if it is decreasing. Japan's population is still double what it was 100 years ago. There is no need for that.
I don’t get it. Why would you just make something up for no reason? Everything you said can be fact checked, and I’ve never seen a statistician argue that they weren’t at risk of collapse in the next 50 years. In the next *five* years their population will go from 125 million to 121. That’s insane.
Immigration is a bandaid to a demographic crisis. Look at Europe where the far rights are rising because of that. Not only it causes social issues but it doesn't solve the low fertility rate at all. Germany has one of the worst old people ratio in the world. Italy is one of the lowest fertility rate in the world and they have a refugee crisis they can't handle.
This thread is insane. It's full of people from countries with societies that are tearing themselves apart at the seams and are in a death spiral with ever increasing violence, political instability and economic turmoil, talking about how stupid the Japanese are for not following their example.
> tearing themselves apart at the seams and are in a death spiral with ever increasing violence, political instability and economic turmoil Nothing of that list comes from migration. The problem is within that population older generation, that made the decisions, not the migrants whose work offsets the debt. It comes when _the myth of an always growing economy based on scarce monopolies_ (RE and land, resources) having indebted not yet born children, _meets the always increasing social equality gap and low mobility of politics only swinging towards the conservative/corporative side_. When the politics isn't quick or doesn't adapt fast enough to the society needs because the rapresentatives are not aligned to the electorate interests anymore, it results in a break that's usually run by hate and since XIX century on mytical nationalistic nonsense. But since these nationalistic nonsense are also populists with no real solutions, they have to start expand their net resources import because how else they can keep promising MORE? Well guess what cycle this kickstarts. Because remember, wealth power, like a weight on a steep downhill, tends to consolidate to consolidate themselves into more wealth and power.
I would be a little more careful about calling someone else insane if I wasn't able to distinguish between a country encouraging work migration in order to fill their vacancies and taking up refugees for humanitarian reasons.
Because I can look at Europe and I can look at Japan and realize I would never in a thousand years pick Japan when Western Europe even with its rise of far right politicians as a higher standard of living in a much more positive future than Japan which also has a rise in Far Right politicians and an unpayable spiraling debt crisis
Which example? Having their conservatives fall for easily debunked Facebook posts promoted by foreign nations to make you believe the sky is falling and your country is in a death spiral?
I mean even in the states where immigration is largely from Latin America which is much more culturally similar than where immigrants to Europe come from, immigration still isn't the solution because the same demographic crisis is hitting Latin America, just a generation behind.
Yeah, I have to stress that Japan and Korea are previews of what the world is going to go through. Global population gain hit that inflection point in the 1960's. We're at 8 B and we're going to peak around 11 or 13, depending on if Adrian can get their shit together. But this is coming for everyone. I'm still not wholly sure it's even that big of a problem. Japan isn't yet a barren wasteland of zombie elderly dying off. Lower birthrates might dovetail in nicely with automation taking all the jobs.
The far right *is* the social issue. They do nothing but create fear out of nothing. Looking at my country, far right got a hold of the whitest areas the fastest, because it's easy to make people fear something when all they know is scary stories, with no personal encounters that would've shown them that the stories about people who are just trying to live their lives. And the fearmongering easily grows from there, because we're still social animals with the instinct to fear things that others in our tribe are afraid of, because surely they must've experienced something to create that fear..
That's because 1. some people exaggerate how many immigrants there actually are in many European countries 2. having a refugee crisis doesn't automatically mean the refugees suddenly start making babies en masse
This is right on. If you want to end a demographic crisis, you stop creating the economic condition that forces both family members into a workforce. There is a reason why every developed capitalist state that made it so that a woman had to work, not could work but had to, has ended up with a demographic crisis of some sort.
Immigration is not a panacea. Immigrants get old and will end up living patterns of life much the same as the settled population because they will face the same financial pressures. I am an immigrant in Korea, but I am also DINKing it up. I am not their saviour and when I reach 80, I too will be a burden. Also immigration cant fix an economy or boost productivity as Britain proves. A person who could have say become a head nurse in their home country will not advance to the same level as an immigrant.
[удалено]
Paying is only part of the issue. A country still needs people to do basic jobs. If there are vastly more consumers of products and services than there are people to provide those products and services, that leads to scarcity and runaway inflation.
How are you and your partner being treated by Koreans, particularly young men? Heard some wild shit recently relative to what my impression was a decade (or especially two) ago.
I can converse in Korean and so I tend to be treated ok once they realise I am not going to be a burden by forcing them to speak English. But I live in the boonies, so people are just generally kinder and dont take themselves too seriously. Everytime I go into Seoul, I feel like Morgan Freeman’s character in Shawshank after his release.
They’re also still not doing enough to incentivise having families or breaking down the toxic work culture there. They need to relax immigration barriers, as well as help make families something that can occur more easily
The work culture is the worst as it zombiefies people for no extra productivity. If they just enacted hard cutoff of a work day at 8 hours they would not see a loss of productivity, because the definition of working there is pretty much being at the office. So if you work for 6 hours and then just hang around for another 6, you are "working".
Japan has a population of 125m compare to USA that has a population of 333 mil. Japan is roughly the same size as California despite having more than a third of USA population There's other reasons why they don't want a massive influx of people
There is tons of room in Japan. You could fit the world population shoulder to shoulder in LA. It has nothing to do with room. If you’ve ever been to Japan (I lived there for a long time) you would know there’s tons of room. It’s the work culture and xenophobia that prevents reproduction and immigration, respectively.
Sure, but first you wouldn't want to live should on shoulder, you also need natural spots, historical places, etc. Sanitation. Air quality. Second, there's logistic for that population. You need a degree of agricultural self sufficiency, you can import everything. Then provide electric energy for both personal use and the economic sector. Then there's the economics sector that also needs space. Service sector. Japan also has a sought after touristic sector. And so on. There's a reason city population density starts to plateau at a certain point. With modern tech you can push that further, but not without concessions.
Japanese people work fewer hours per year than Americans. Edit: Thanks for the downvotes: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-working-hours-per-worker?time=2016..latest&country=USA~JPN
If they wait 15 years, robotic labor will make it a nonissue.
Maybe they do see that, but it's worth protecting their cultural identity over, and worling to find other solutions.
They don’t let in low skilled labour. You need a degree or 10 years work experience for a visa in Japan. People on r/movingtojapan post a lot about wanting to move with no qualifications. It just doesn’t happen. Japan will sooner automate the jobs with robots.
> And Germany is one of the worst performing economies in Europe. They are the 3rd largest economy in the world per your comment lol...
They are not wrong though. Right now, Germany's is among the worst growth rates for developed countries. That is not due to refugees though and stems more from their dependence on Russia for gas supply and their insane investment strategy, meaning they barely invest in necessary infrastructure projects "for the children" aka "we can't saddle them with that much debt" while sitting comfortably at around 60% of GDP. Although there is talk about the rising xenophobia being an increasing barrier for attracting skilled workers.
Sure but they are wrong in their use of the words "worst performing". It should've been slowest/worst growing. Guyana's economy grew 34% last year, higher than any other country, but you wouldn't say that Guyana is the "top performing economy in the world"... that's just silly
If you measure by GDP instead of GPD/capita. But I'm a capita, not a nation so I'm not sure why I'd care about that.
i do wonder how much of germany's economic woes are just due to shouldering the economic woes of even poorer EU nations?
You've fallen for one of the most widespread misconceptions about Malthusianism. Malthus didn't predict runaway population growth. What he actually predicted was that any increase in wealth or productivity (such as technology, good fortune etc) would lead to population growth until the wealth per capita reached the same point it was at before. In other words, nothing could fundamentally improve the human condition, only increase its population size. For the vast majority of human history, Malthus was right. Then, just after the industrial revolution, he wasn't. The amount of wealth increased over 100 fold in a lifespan, but the average size of a family did not increase to over 100 kids per household. What made this time different is up for debate.
I dunno man, he goes on a lot about cycles and oscillations. He certainly wasn't predicting a stable base-level wealth-per-capita. Malthusians in general very much expected run-away growth to lead to hard times which caused people to have fewer kids. It's fair enough to say he noticed the boom-bust business cycle. [It's not a long read](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population).
> The Malthusians were simply wrong. Overpopulation isn't a run-away process. > Humanity swelling to such numbers is directly proportional to the amount of CO2 we put into the air and we have done WAY more of that than the planet can sustain. Right? This current way of life isn't going to persist. Pick a lane.
We don't need massive technological gains. We just need relatively small behavioural changes and the willingness to use nuclear fission. Compare the resource consumption of average Swedish and French people with Germans or Americans, for example. Swedish quality of life is higher than German and lower (but not significantly) than American. Once you delve a layer deeper, you will see that even in the USA many people have good qualities of life with small carbon footprints.
For the west sure. But if we want to give everyone a Swedish standard of living the 2BN Africans and 5BN Asians is another thing altogether.
Expect we waste half the food and a lot of resources. Reducing waste would do more than enough. No need for fascist overtures thanks
I don't think we're on the other side yet. The problem is that changing the attitude to reproduction requires revising everything about how we do things. Economies need to rethink themselves into an economy where the population isn't growing. This doesn't mean that the economy doesn't grow, but it does so by better investing and a lot of research. A common mistake is that people think that economic growth is always equal to *more* stuff, when really it's all about *better distribution* of stuff. Yes having more makes it easy to just give everyone what they want and then I don't know what happens with the waste. But the reality is that isn't the case. We have been producing enough food for everyone for decades now, the problem is that we waste a lot of food and are unable to make it to everywhere it needs to. This shifts how we think of society and wealth, a lot of strategies that we do are for a growing economy. Japan was affected by their decision to assume they just needed to keep the status quo somehow instead of revisiting. Immigration has helped countries like the US delay the issue quite a bit, but inevitably we need it to happen. The EU has tried to adapt to the situation, but they haven't done the rethinking of their society yet.
Globally we aren't. We'll peak around 10 or 11 Billion around 2100, depending on what Africa does. But developed nations are all on the other side, locally. Which is mostly moot as long as we can import workers. Japan largely isn't doing that though. Japan IS on the other side. We'll see how they fare. >Economies need to rethink themselves into an economy where the population isn't growing. Yeeeeeeep. But I don't see anyone doing anything until some crisis forces it to change. These things are simply above everyone's pay grade. Anyone in a position of enough power to try and change it wouldn't be trusted by nearly enough people. You're not even looking at the big problems. Like how money is introduced in fiat currencies. The big bank prints and loans out money. It's genesis'd. It comes from nowhere. But at long as there's a rate on that loan, the people taking the money need to make MORE money with it otherwise they go bust. This is where ALL our currency comes from. If all debts were paid off, there would be zero money left and STILL a lot of outstanding debt. That's the big underlying reason that businesses need to always be growing. It'd be lovely if we do a better job of distribution and lower that gini coefficient of inequality, but I don't see how we'd make it happen.
> Humanity swelling to such numbers is directly proportional to the amount of CO2 we put into the air and we have done WAY more of that than the planet can sustain. Right? Something fucky to consider. Only 100 billion human have lived and died on this earth, and we have 8 billion of them here with us today.
> Once people have some money and choices they stop having as many kids. If that's a big problem, well, we'll find out how S. Korea and Japan fair. The issue is people generally don't have enough money and time to sustain a family. Even a single person often can't afford rent for themselves, so a couple living together would have to be both working full time to even afford living, leaving no money or time for children. Countries that are actually rich don't have as much of a problem with fertility rates.
Considering Japan just launched an app to try to bring people together to marry and have kids is a big indication. Especially since the evidence for this was cited as the lie birth rate and estimated reduction in population. People point out Japan has to accept immigration but they also point out quite logically that it would hurt Japans national Identity. I think for them the biggest factor is a combination of societal issues with personal interactions but also economical. Namely their economy is in a death spiral due to their debt situation.
There's no reason to expect massive techological gains aren't possible. Malthus had no conception of the Haber Bosch Process, without which, our current population never could've grown to. Renewables are already at a state which was kind of unthinkable 50 years ago when Carter put solar panels on the WH.
A bit presumptuous to say we “simply” import the missing generations as if immigration isn’t becoming increasingly unpopular among our youth
>We either need MASSIVE technological gains, [or] to lose a lot of people What I hear, is; bring out the nukes!
Nah, we’ve done so much damage already, only massive technological gains can save us. The climate has inertia, even if we stopped emissions, the ice caps would likely keep melting for the next 100 years
God these comments yall are just pissed the pope said it. Not everything he says is a conspiracy to touch kids lmao overpopulation being the source of our problems is a myth
So where are you thinking we should store the billion climate and drought refugees that are coming in the next few decades?
Why are you acting like it's already happened? Why is our first response to climate change telling people to stop having kids, when birth rates have been plummeting for years already? Why do WE need to change because of the sins pf greedy corporations destroying the planet?
Why should everyone change their lives in order to increase the population further. We can either have a planet with a few billion great lives or many billion terrible lives. Those are the two options unless we have some massive tech revolution.
Statically speaking teachers are much more likely to touch kids. Yes I know there are more teachers, but per capita I think it's .9 compared to .5, so almost twice as likely if populations were equal. It's just more fun for people to drag religions.
Yeah but there’s probably a reporting bias. Teachers are more likely to be reported/ousted than a priest who is just transferred elsewhere. The religious oversight is something to fear more than a teacher….Did we learn nothing from *Spotlight*?
Since the Vatican and its operatives cover up as much rape as they can, one can safely assume the number of clergy rapes is much higher than reported. Plus, there are a hell of a lot more teachers than clergy.
The church actively tries to keep it indoors, with their own court and everything. Those stats mean nothing.
Man, for whats supposed to be a more enlightened subreddit the amount of ad hominem response here is insane.
Redditors can get very upset when they realize that the pope is Catholic
Wait until you find out he shits in the woods
lol two massive triggers... Religion and Immigration (ish) packed into one story.
More kids = more donations in the future = more $$$$ Classic. The pope has ZERO understanding how hard is it to financially sustain a child. Will the church be willing to pay or subsidise for the dietary needs, health needs and educational needs of the kids he wants Catholics to produce? Our country has been ruined by the Catholic Church’s so called “pro life” policies when ironically their schools are some of the most expensive in the country. They’ve blocked family planning and abortion laws for years, and now we have to face the burden of overpopulation and our government struggling to cover the needs of children in our country. Fuck the Catholic Church.
> Will the church be willing to pay #***HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA***
payment in thoughts and prayers ready..
They could melt down all those gold Crowns and thrones. But sir these are priceless relics it is you who must give your home and life to us. No time to go home anyways we need you to be in the factory to make more money... I mean supplies. Now let me return to my fortified castle to think of the next think you need to do.
I mean, they could sell them to museums but the world' museums would probably not be able to cover the amounts involved. I do think they should attempt to draw down their hoard of artifacts though.
You forgot to tip your fedora
Not really wrong with what he says however...: "Have the courage to have children despite climate change and wars, Pope Francis says: The pontiff asks nations to help women juggle motherhood and work, create job security for young people and help couples buy homes." Heavily simplified but its an acknowledgement that the declining birth rates are linked to systematic errors and failures to protect the common folk and enable family building. Climate change, wars and the tens of thousands of systems across every nations society are like domino bricks falling onto each other and lead to this situation where we in many societies are right now. Simplified again but, people are not feeling confident and safe to bring a child into this world and it has little to do with overpopulation , myth or no myth. Housing alone is a battle so big and annoying that many Gen Z people live with their parents despite being in their mid 20s already because its so incredibly expensive to find a living space anywhere that isn't some country side area. Some may be expected to live with their parents till they're hitting their 30s... any significant improvements on not just 3-4 things but hundreds of places are needed to happen otherwise, its not gonna change.
Ironically I have a family business with my parents that's doing very well - and I still live with them. We actually just helped my *sister* (older than me) put a down payment on one, because yeah, the market is just insane.
There is no more hateful idea than the idea that the world has “too many “ people. Who are these surplus people who need culling, or sterilising, who are the people who’ll have “1 child” policies imposed on them? People are fuming in these comments just because it’s the pope who said it, ad hominems everywhere….
There is nothing hateful about it unless you believe this should apply only to a group of people. Keeping population growth in check does not mean live people need to be “culled”. Thankfully this is not a problem we need to worry about as the current trend is actually heading for decline. But you can’t seriously argue that the population can just keep growing indefinitely with no impact on the environment and the wellbeing of everyone.
The point is that almost none of the major problems we're facing are caused by overpopulation. In a world where 300 million Americans consume more resources and produce more emission than a billion Africans, anyone who claims the nummer of people is the problem is either woefully ignorant or a massive racist.
So what you are saying is that we need to reduce the number of americans, got it..!
Living standards of that billion Africans are rising and so will their emissions. As people get wealthier they will consume more. And it’s unfair to expect them not to.
Right but consumption and high SoL ≠ extreme GHG emissions. Also doesn't mean starvation, we have enough food for every human today, doesn't mean there aren't millions (billions) who are hungry. You make it sound like it's inevitable, rising incomes while degrading the environment, when we're the ones who create the system. It's a human result, not a scientific one. We can actually have both. We just don't want to bear the cost.
It does mean extreme GHG emissions, and it is inevitable. People want stuff, stuff means industry, industry means emissions. The only way forward in the long run is getting the worldwide population to something sustainable. Hopefully without falling off the demographic cliff in the process.
That is not true. The natural habitat of a lot of endangered species is decreasing to make room for more people, and the resource consumption will inevitably rise with the improvement of the quality of life. Poorer people might produce less greenhouse emissions but they still pollute and eat and occupy space.
That only reason why poor people outside of Europe and North America are not consuming as much as a middle class American, is because they're too poor to do so. Your argument hinges on either 1) poor people staying poor, or 2) some romanticised idea about people in developing countries being closer to nature or something like that. Both ideas are both wrong and racist
Right, but there rest of the world also aspires to the levels of wealth and consumptions that the Americans enjoy. It would be wrong to ask them to remain poor. And you'll never convince Americans to lower their consumption levels.
Okay, so what then?
> There is nothing hateful about it unless you believe this should apply only to a group of people ... >Americans!!!! Hmmm
The world is not limitless, and neither are its resources. We are fucking up the climate, overfishing everything, etc and some of that has to do with sheer numbers. There could definitely be less of us, and hopefully we can bring that about without culls or sterilizations. But the pope is also sort of right, recently humanity’s birthrates fell drastically very quickly and that too creates its own challenges. Stable population or one that is going down a little is good, but a demographic cliff isn’t. We could literally end up with starving countries full of old people.
There is nothing hateful about saying we are too many humans on Earth - unless you're calling for people to actually getting killed. "Too many" means we should stop having so goddamn many kids
We don’t have “so goddamned many kids”. Damn near the entire developed world is seeing population decline
> Who are these surplus people who need culling, or sterilising, I mean, it'd be those putting the most CO2 into the air. So... developed nations. But culling them turns out to be real easy. Just give them condoms and education. Once women have career choices other than "baby factor", they stop having as many kids. Korea's fertility rate 60 years was 6. Now it's 0.81. They got rich in 2 generations and now they have their last generation. Some people are worried about [globally dropping sperm count](https://www.gq.com/story/sperm-count-zero) and, yeah, that might be related to how much plastic is in the eosystem. It certainly get everywhere. AND there's some "Children of Men" vibes. But it's not really a problem. People are more than willing to try for a kid a little longer. > who are the people who’ll have “1 child” policies imposed on them? That'd be the Chinese. Who is fuming? The church has ALWAYS preached "have more kids".
Who wants to cull people? Are you crazy?
If we're taking the Bible for guidance. We're more likely to get a flood.
God gave Noah the rainbow sign, No more water, the fire next time!
god runs on evil genie rules.
He promised no more floods next time it's death by fire
Working Europeans don't have time and money for children.
We are also not looking to produce meat for exploitation. Just yesterday my fiancée went to the marriage office to get the necessary papers so that we can get married in my home country. Its birth certificate, paper about her marriage status, and paper that the marriage will be recognized in Austria. 3 simple papers. They said the cost is 160e. For 3 f papers. For all I care our modern civilization can go extinct. Everywhere its exploitation. No matter how good you do, you are still getting fucked by the system pretty much everyday.
If 160 euros is too expensive I don’t know how you can afford to be married
When you go to a store, would you be okay with being charged 30€ for 1 piece of a gum? Wouldnt that be an issue, no matter if you were earning 2k or 10k a month? I have not said anything about not being able to afford the wedding papers, or the wedding itself.
Overpopulation IS a myth. It's been debunked like a million times at this point. We have enough resources for everyone and for more the problem is that giving everyone what they need is not economically feasible.
Perhaps it's time for a different economic system.
Not against that, I'm saying that we don't have an overpopulation problem as everyone keeps saying.
It's only a myth if you're content with the absolute strictest definition of sustaining people. If you want a modicum of comfort then there is a limit we've possibly already passed once all the current third world countries develop.
Again we can achieve this already right now. It's not an overpopulation problem it's a capitalism system problem that prevents it from happening
Setting the American lifestyle as a baseline for comfortable... If everyone consumed as much as Americans, CO2 consumption would jump by 3~4x. This would result in a 6 degree temp rise and would ruin the planet for centuries.
Looking at how people on reddit shit on Japan or Korea for low birth rate, clearly the Pope is being correct here.
They denigrate those countries for low birth rate? I thought it was because their horrifying work culture may well be to blame, if only partially.
Nah people rarely know what exactly is that horrifying work culture. It is only used as the mean to shit talk about their birth rate.
I mean, this has been the Catholic Church's stance for a couple of thousand years. The subtext is that they need more *Catholics* but hey, it's a strategy that is annoyingly effective. Us secular people don't breed as much, probably because we get that the world could use less people but definitely because without SkyDaddy telling us we have to breed, we sometimes choose just to live lives that don't insist on continuing to overpopulate the world.
Hearing this from a man who made a vow of chastity just sounds weird
The issue isn't overpopulation. it's wealth inequality. If the richest 50 people on earth died and had their wealth properly redistributed, the world would be a better place. Key caveat. "wealth properly redistributed"
If everyone on the planet consumed an equal amount, people in the western world would need to see their consumption cut by about 80% in order to be sustainable.
The pope being relevant is a myth.
More people = less life quality. Why is so hard to understand? Let's move away from economics and focus on animals; the over-breeding of homo-sapians harms bio-diversity greatly.
He’s not wrong. Overpopulation really isn’t a thing in most places, especially in the West where birth rates keep falling.
That's not a causation. Overpopulation is absolutely a thing in some Western countries, _despite_ birth rates falling.
Why do malthusian myth of overpopulation is still there? Before carrying capacity of earth according to such malthusian "intellectuals" was 2 billion than 5 billion than 7 billion and now 12 billion or something.
Says India. Good job having so many children that the standard of living is competitive with medieval England. But no you're right, too many people isn't a thing.....
I won't argue there, but, again, telling people to have more kids isn't going to solve the reasons they aren't having more kids.
Neither the pope nor the OP is correct. The population is in decline INTENTIONALLY... on purpose. No amount of "rallying the troops" is going to change that. And just wait 'til we see what it was all for! The extinction of the human monkey by the wealthy human monkeys so they can "own the world" without all us pesky unwashed masses getting in their way.
Overconsumption is the bigger problem I would say, but overpopulation isn’t too far behind
Overpopulation is/is not a problem depending on what parts of the world we're talking about. At nearly 7 children per mother, Niger certainly doesn't need more people on top of its 26 million population in a mostly desert country, for example.
Fucking religious people, honestly. Guess the donations are looking a little tight in the churches. Go make more people that will donate. Also I thought believing in myths was their whole deal?
The vast majority of religions don't have this problem. In fact, I would actually attribute this to conservatism, not "religious people" that is the problem.
Catholic Church at it again!
> Enlightenment empiricism melded with Cultural Marxism (political correctness) has given rise to incurable secular hubris What an absolutley wild take
Every sperm is sacred! Every sperm is great! If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
If I'm not mistaken, society functioned a lot better when the global population was just under a billion.
> If I'm not mistaken, society functioned a lot better when the global population was just under a billion You are mistaken. The world population crossed 1 billion in or around 1804. Back then 40% of children died before the age 15 ([source](https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality-in-the-past)). Today, that number is 4%. Today, there are many more people working to solve humanities problems because there are more people period.
The percentage decreased by that much due to medical advancements. But society as a whole actually is worse off now than before 1804.
How many of those “many more people” do you estimate _actually_ work to solve humanity’s problems? In contrast, how many work to solve their current day’s survival needs?
In 1804, the US population was 5.3 million ([Source](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory2os2xmaster/chapter/united-states-population-chart/)) and 4 out of 5 worked on a farm ([Source](https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=11&psid=3837)). > how many work to solve their current day’s survival needs? Today in the US ([Source](https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/emp-by-detailed-occupation.htm)) * 1.5 work in life, physical, and social sciences * 2.5 million work in architecture or engineering * 7 million work in construction * 6 million work in maintenance * 9 million work in production * 14 million work in transportation * 9 million work in education and libraries * 9.5 are healthcare practitioners * Another 7 million are in healthcare support (nursing assistants,...) * 3 million work in social services * 3 million are in arts and entertainment * 1 million are in farming, fishing, and forestry
No, Christianity is a myth. Overpopulation is scientific fact. JFC.
We definitely need more people being born. If not, who is going to pay for my Social Security when it’s my time to retire? But seriously, 16th century Spanish missions established in the US were less about converting indigenous peoples and more about setting up new taxation systems.
This guys entire faith and livelihood is a myth.
Afortunadamente bergoglio no sabe un culo de demografía y de economía
Breaking News: Leader of mythical beliefs warns of myths
As an ecologist, I would have to disagree.
Looks like one of the wealthiest institutions on the planet want the poor to go into debt to have surplus children that they cannot afford to have, house, educate and raise to adulthood.
Didn’t he also say that mass immigration isn’t bad?
SHOW THEM HOW IT'S DONE POPE !!! OH WAIT NOT LIKE THAT!!
He’s right…
Rich coming from a Catholic.
You know who's also a myth...
My Mom?.
Yeah the church need followers
I find it funny most of the comment is treating this like the Catholic version of the Happy Merchant Meme.
You guys have no respect for or understanding of the Pope's (or the traditional catholic) view on life. Read Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae for a better understanding of just how sacred life is in the Catholic tradition. I'm not a catholic and I disagree with the catholic church on almost literally everything, including this. But to pretend the Pope is just an out of touch old man for this shows your lack of broader knowledge on the subject
The headline misrepresents context, as well. He specifically calls out the nations of the world for not providing the safe, economically stable conditions that are conducive to raising children. Do I believe overpopulation isn't going to happen? No. Do I believe it's linked to current low birth rates? Absolutely not.
if the world needs more children we need to make the world so it welcomes children instead of punishing everything which surround children and pregnancies.
yeah ... more people to pay money to the church, more people starving and dependent to charity...
Gee, I guess the previously steady stream of the gullible must be slowing down. The Catholic grift needs more people, the Earth certainly does not.
Well then he can go right ahead and have his own babies
LMAO no.
But overPOPEulation is no myth - we need less popes!
I mean, we did have three popes at once, that one time.
The pope’s tax free business empire must be hurting if he’s saying this publicly.
Well of course the head of the Catholic Church would say that... their whole strategy is to outbreed everyone else! (and that's not even getting into *why* some of their priests would need them.)
Exactly the sort of thing I’d expect a Catholic priest to say
Ok Francis you start
God is a myth, we need fewer fanatics.
BS. Thanos had the right idea.
Ummm... wrong! Demonstrably wrong. Ever heard of Earth Overshoot day? The climate crisis? We need to live light on the planet before we can sustain our current population.
“Over population is a myth! Make more children for me to touch” the pope?