Why Is Population Growth Seldom Discussed?

[Warren DeMontague]

198. You're damn right I put it in quotes.

Population issues go beyond current rates of growth. The United States, at its current level of population, is overpopulated. The world as a whole, at its current level of population, is overpopulated.

--- says you. So, okay, given that it is both a statistical fact that the US fertility rate is already below replacement levels, AND what population growth there is in the US is due to immigration- again, statistical fact; what exactly do you propose be done about the so-called overpopulation here in the US? I mean, I understand that less than 2 babies per 2 parents is still far too many wailing infants to fuck up some peoples' fine dining experience at TGIFs or whatever (yes, I've been on DU for a long time), but there is only so much reduction that can be done between 2 and zero. So, again, what precise real-world concrete policy proposals would make you happy, in this regard?

So is it a solution to envision bringing the rest of the world up to the U.S. standard of living, in the hope that, along with other factors such as overcoming religious barriers to reproductive rights, the result will be population stabilization? No, it isn't.

I'm sure that's easy for you to say, as you sit on a computer and drink clean water and don't have to worry about your family members dying of what should be entirely treatable illnesses. What was the overwhelming lesson of the entirely preventable ebola tragedy -and yes, for the 10K people or so killed and their families, it was not a "manufactured FOX news crisis", it was a real tragedy- of the past year? It was that countries like Sierra Leone and Liberia are suffering with terribly dilapidated health care infrastructures, and it is incumbent- both morally and from a self-interest perspective- on the rest of the world to help them in that regard.

Given the choice, I suspect that much of the rest of the world would say, "yeah, actually, that 1st world standard of living doesn't sound so terrible, and we'll figure out the resource and energy issues just like you guys are working on them". I think it's awfully arrogant to presume to condemn the rest of the planet to live in permanent abject poverty because, hey, you know, the environment- our bad.

I happen to believe our problems - resource utilization, sustainable energy- will be solved by moving FORWARD, not backward. I know that's a position that pisses some people off immeasurably, but again, too fucking bad. Just like how being pro choice magically turns into a position that pisses some people off, as soon as the topic is the "population problem". Again, sorry, but too damn bad.

And perhaps not coincidentally enough, that is how the 1st world has dealt with fertility and population- not by going backwards, but by going forward. With the tools of personal freedom and access to contraception, the problem has solved itself. Presto.