Edit: I wanted to apologize after reading some of the comments. You raise some legitimate points, I realize that there is a subtle malthusian element to this chart and some of you feel like a burden already. Furthermore, you raise a good point about corporate pollution, oil companies, and how their footprint is much greater than average plebs like us.

That’s 100% valid and I don’t disagree with you at all. My “compromise” I guess would be that continue to apply pressure and protest against large corporations, but in terms of ourselves, just pick a few things you can cut down on yourself, it does not have to be everything on this list.

For example, I really prefer having animal products in my diet, but I am willing to live in a small apartment , car-free, and not go on vacation much in my adulthood. In the same way, you guys can pick what you are comfortable with in reducing and what you do not want to compromise on.

All of us have different standards of living and we are flexible on some things, and some things we are not flexible. That is alright, just consider changing what you are comfortable with, but please do not think you are a burden. Your presence and your life is valuable to me. I don’t like to demoralize people.

  • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
    22·
    1 year ago

    Overpopulation is a climate issue and I would argue the mindset of trying to promote owns legacy by having more than one, let alone more than two children is definitely something that needs to be addressed. The climate impact is real. You can’t just be like “I deserve to spread my seed as far as I can.”

    Knowing the cost of something is important and having children does have an impact on everyone else.

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      11·
      1 year ago

      Just to back up comrade @commie, let me copy pasta myself:

      In reality overpopulation is a myth and rather population decline is a real concern in many countries.
      Now of course we can talk about who this concerns and why (under the current system? It concerns those who need workers to exploit, white supremacists looking to “overturn” the “great replacement”, in some cases both, and it also concerns the aging population that will end up with very little support, something which wouldn’t be as big an issue if we had stronger communities, but alienation and all that jazz, as well as the fewer workers who will remain to keep the economy going for minimal pay as they get bossed around by AI, because capitalism), and also about who pushes the overpopulation myth and why, but the bottom line is - the population isn’t and never has been the problem (we already produce enough food to sustain everyone alive today and then some), it is capitalism and it’s dependence on creating infinite growth in a finite world, at the expense of everyone and everything on the planet (themselves included except for the handful who will end up in orbit or whatever. And then die) that is the problem, and what we need to get rid of if we want to stop this dystopian spiral.

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        Mitigating some substantial percentage of that population growth would be one way to better environmental conditions in 2050. It would also have more impact than virtually any other climate policy. (More on that later.)

        From your own sources.

        Edit: it’s kind of weird your source for “it’s a myth” is an article saying it’s not but that talking about it just leads a bunch of people to the wrong conclusions about the speaker due to poor past examples.