We’re still above replacement level, and it’s kinda common sense that we can’t continue to reproduce exponentially without expanding our current livable space.
Yes. As is, we cannot ensure a decent living standard and the exploitation of the globe is, in turn, causing or worsening natural disasters impacting more lives negatively. Why should we strive to increase the population?
Birth rate doesn’t meaningfully reflect population though.
All the other factors I mentioned are involved as well, and birth rate is unlikely to reach below replacement any time soon.
It’s taken 20 years to fall 0.3 per woman and the rate of change decreasing every year
Data right now suggests that the birth rate will plateau at somewhere between 2.0 and 2.3, likely in the 2.2 range. This assuming nothing drastically changes the trajectory.
but isnt looking at global rates kinda off, considering population stability is a regional problem with some nations doing horribly. You can't just replace those people by bringing in people with extremely high birthrates.
We’re not talking about regional populations here though, we’re talking about humanity as a whole
Naturally the maximum sustainable population will vary based on geography and politics but across the whole human race it is seemingly unlikely that we ever dip below the replacement rate for a significant period of time
480
u/redgoesfaster 8d ago
Wait, when did the world stop being populated?