"Yes we understand the problems but instead of tackling poverty and widespread hunger and pollution let's just reduce 99.999% of the population by not having babies, which is a totally sensible way to solve the climate catastrophe"
"Yes we understand the problems but instead of tackling poverty and widespread hunger and pollution let's just reduce 99.999% of the population by not having babies, which is a totally sensible way to solve the climate catastrophe"
Why do they still hold on to the "exponential growth" excuse? The population is currently increasing, but not exponentially, and will eventually plateau in the next century. Granted, the world will be a hellscape if nothing changes in 100 years, but the majority of consumption occurs in industrialized countries with lower birthrates. I can almost guarantee that this r*dditor has a greater impact on the climate than a family of subsistence farmers in Bangladesh.