i agree with much of this but i can’t quite agree with the “more people means more inventors” ... the counter factual is europe from 1000-1700/1800 only had a couple tens of millions and worldwide only few hundred million people but even in these eras of smaller populations, they produced intellectual contributions and art pieces far greater than anything produced today, interesting no? ... refraining your productivity argument why not figure out how to boost the genius rate from .1% to 1% instead of just having more people, you’d get all the benefits with less people
I wonder how much modern assortative mating will contribute to productivity increases. Most people are meeting online now and filtering for higher standards (education, income, health, etc.). How much more 'productive' will the 1-2 children of the ideally/maximally matched couple be, vs. the 3-4 children of the couple that met through more happenstance in the past. (just a thought, and I'm not saying one is 'better' than the other)
I can't get on board with this thesis. Without going into too much detail, I can toss out a few arguments to the contrary.
First, although we may not wish to acknowledge it, the planet's resources do have finite physical limits, and our use of these resources is still growing, and it is growing exponentially. If population continues to expand, this trend will continue.
Second, most of our science can demonstrate limits beyond which no human ingenuity can reach. The efficiency of energy conversion by wind turbines; the maximum possible efficiency of the basic steam cycle; even the maximum amount of solar energy that hits the Earth's surface is limited, and no amount of ingenuity can raise it. Whether we have reached or are approaching these limits can be argued, but not the facts of their existence.
I grant it is quite likely that there are yet a certain number of important scientific discoveries that might yet be made. But arguing that an increase in the population will allow humanity to put more geniuses to work on finding solutions that 8 billion of us have not yet found is kind of like plowing all your money into the lottery hoping your winnings will keep you from going broke until you "inevitably" hit the big one.
And let us not forget: while we might get more Mozarts, Michelangelos, and Einsteins, we might also get more Stalins, Hitlers, and Pol Pots.
I think in 50-100 years it will be viewed as very ignorant that we thought we could just allow the global population to go unchecked for so many years.
And a lot of it will be related to capitalism and how capitalism works. The history of capitalism has always been for weath to accumulate more and more in the hands of a few who then pass this wealth down within their family.
Whereas the remaining population without this golden spoon struggle against globalization (ie. competing against low cost labor in other countries), AI, etc. And they do so all while trying to purchase overinflated assets (eg. houses) whose prices were driven up by the small number of wealthy.
The history of capitalism is that it always ends in some kind of revolution. Because the common person gets squeezed to the point where they feel they cant survive. I think you now have 50% of America feeling this way.
And so you arrive at revolution UNLESS you somehow control population. By controlling population all of a sudden you now drive up the cost of human labor. To a point where they can now afford assets and afford to live like common American household was in the 1980s.
“Capitalism always ends in some kind of revolution”. Name one example or place where capitalism has ended. China turned to communism after WWII but Deng Xiao Ping brought capitalism back (all be-it under authoritarian one party rule with state backing) which lead to huge improvements in China per capita income. North Korea didn’t come about by revolution and is no workers’ paradise. Venezuela? Basket case. Maybe only Cuba fits you’re description and it’s pretty clear if given the choice most Cuban workers there would rather live in Florida or even Puerto Rico. Do you think the 50% of Americans who don’t approve of Biden really want Bernie instead? So instead of a worker’s revolution which won’t happen, your plan is to ‘control population’? Would this be forced sterilization and abortion? No-kill internment caps for fertile wealthy class traitors, or do envision a more complete solution. I want my ¢2 back.
I'd also point to the fact that revolutions do not always need to be violent. And i would say that much of Europe is essentially socialism like Scandanavia where tax rates for the wealthy are well above 50%.
Show me one example of capitalism where it has worked out well long-term? the US and UK are falling apart... have you visited your average american town and see the state that the average household is in? I myself have moved permanently to SE Asia and never really had to 'struggle'.
But having spent a few weeks in my dad's town (about 1-2 hrs outside of Seattle) i had a pretty good glimpse of what your avg american household looks like.. ie. the "Walmart lifestyle" and i think its bleak as hell.
And i began to understand how the hell a whacko like Trump gets elected... because these people have nothing to look forward to. They're in debt, can't afford to live, cant afford to take care of their children, barely holding onto a job, etc.
That is not some exception.. that is the majority of America now.
In any case, we'll see how this shit plays out... but i dont see it playing out well unless more aggressive measures are put in place.
"controlling population" seems like such an innocent pair of words until you consider the implications. Beware anyone who is able to utter them so casually
i dont disagree... we all saw how it worked in china for several decades.
there are for sure risks and drawbacks.
but i'd argue.. "beware turning a blind eye to the plight of well over 50% of america that can no longer afford to live... and are now gonna be under further pressure from AI."
I think you got another couple decades before it turns into revolution
Unbridled idiocy. China isn't powerful because it has an insanely high population. China applied innovation and capitalism well.
So did Japan.
India and China's population in 2010 weren't that far apart. Look at Bangladesh, Pakistan, Brazil. I am sure they don't feel that having a billion people in each of those countries isn't going to make them switzerland.
The solution for the West and developed Asia's demographic crisis seems to be that developed countries will take the smartest people from the developing world. Germany has a deal with Kenya for taking skilled workers. Canada is increasing immigration like crazy. We will see talent pour into the West and we will see developing countries reduce their chronic youth unemployment woes.
Here's the Kenyan President openly saying he wants more Kenyans to go abroad:
This is poetry: “You are the carbon they want to reduce.” Love this whole post! “We are a way for the cosmos to know itself” — how could there be a more noble and virtuous aim than expanding the self-understanding of the cosmos and creating more beautiful life to experience the unfathomly rare treasure of living?
Great essay. Would be even more impactful if you shared your personal experience with family formation. We need both better, ie more positive memes about family formation-- kids are awesome, parenting is joy, family formation is success mode-- and more realistic memes about the supposed benefits of Eat, Pray, Love footloose adventuring and the egg freezing/IVF industrial complex. The other half is Keeper-type mating apps-- ones geared toward family formation vs. ticket taking on the cock carousel that has done more damage to female well-being and opportunities for happiness than the traditional woman-as-chattel patriarchy ever did (not suggesting we go back). I wrote about the fight for family formation here and have recently funded a startup that is building a tech and meme implementation of the essay's main ideas. Check it out-- happy that folks are discussing this-- https://open.substack.com/pub/timparsa/p/fighting-for-family-formation?r=4gw8s&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
i agree with much of this but i can’t quite agree with the “more people means more inventors” ... the counter factual is europe from 1000-1700/1800 only had a couple tens of millions and worldwide only few hundred million people but even in these eras of smaller populations, they produced intellectual contributions and art pieces far greater than anything produced today, interesting no? ... refraining your productivity argument why not figure out how to boost the genius rate from .1% to 1% instead of just having more people, you’d get all the benefits with less people
I wonder how much modern assortative mating will contribute to productivity increases. Most people are meeting online now and filtering for higher standards (education, income, health, etc.). How much more 'productive' will the 1-2 children of the ideally/maximally matched couple be, vs. the 3-4 children of the couple that met through more happenstance in the past. (just a thought, and I'm not saying one is 'better' than the other)
Good read.
“You are the carbon they want to reduce.” 😂
“People aren’t merely stomachs, they’re also brains.” 💡
I can't get on board with this thesis. Without going into too much detail, I can toss out a few arguments to the contrary.
First, although we may not wish to acknowledge it, the planet's resources do have finite physical limits, and our use of these resources is still growing, and it is growing exponentially. If population continues to expand, this trend will continue.
Second, most of our science can demonstrate limits beyond which no human ingenuity can reach. The efficiency of energy conversion by wind turbines; the maximum possible efficiency of the basic steam cycle; even the maximum amount of solar energy that hits the Earth's surface is limited, and no amount of ingenuity can raise it. Whether we have reached or are approaching these limits can be argued, but not the facts of their existence.
I grant it is quite likely that there are yet a certain number of important scientific discoveries that might yet be made. But arguing that an increase in the population will allow humanity to put more geniuses to work on finding solutions that 8 billion of us have not yet found is kind of like plowing all your money into the lottery hoping your winnings will keep you from going broke until you "inevitably" hit the big one.
And let us not forget: while we might get more Mozarts, Michelangelos, and Einsteins, we might also get more Stalins, Hitlers, and Pol Pots.
My two cents on the subject...
I think in 50-100 years it will be viewed as very ignorant that we thought we could just allow the global population to go unchecked for so many years.
And a lot of it will be related to capitalism and how capitalism works. The history of capitalism has always been for weath to accumulate more and more in the hands of a few who then pass this wealth down within their family.
Whereas the remaining population without this golden spoon struggle against globalization (ie. competing against low cost labor in other countries), AI, etc. And they do so all while trying to purchase overinflated assets (eg. houses) whose prices were driven up by the small number of wealthy.
The history of capitalism is that it always ends in some kind of revolution. Because the common person gets squeezed to the point where they feel they cant survive. I think you now have 50% of America feeling this way.
And so you arrive at revolution UNLESS you somehow control population. By controlling population all of a sudden you now drive up the cost of human labor. To a point where they can now afford assets and afford to live like common American household was in the 1980s.
“Capitalism always ends in some kind of revolution”. Name one example or place where capitalism has ended. China turned to communism after WWII but Deng Xiao Ping brought capitalism back (all be-it under authoritarian one party rule with state backing) which lead to huge improvements in China per capita income. North Korea didn’t come about by revolution and is no workers’ paradise. Venezuela? Basket case. Maybe only Cuba fits you’re description and it’s pretty clear if given the choice most Cuban workers there would rather live in Florida or even Puerto Rico. Do you think the 50% of Americans who don’t approve of Biden really want Bernie instead? So instead of a worker’s revolution which won’t happen, your plan is to ‘control population’? Would this be forced sterilization and abortion? No-kill internment caps for fertile wealthy class traitors, or do envision a more complete solution. I want my ¢2 back.
How about the Russian revolution?
I'd also point to the fact that revolutions do not always need to be violent. And i would say that much of Europe is essentially socialism like Scandanavia where tax rates for the wealthy are well above 50%.
Show me one example of capitalism where it has worked out well long-term? the US and UK are falling apart... have you visited your average american town and see the state that the average household is in? I myself have moved permanently to SE Asia and never really had to 'struggle'.
But having spent a few weeks in my dad's town (about 1-2 hrs outside of Seattle) i had a pretty good glimpse of what your avg american household looks like.. ie. the "Walmart lifestyle" and i think its bleak as hell.
And i began to understand how the hell a whacko like Trump gets elected... because these people have nothing to look forward to. They're in debt, can't afford to live, cant afford to take care of their children, barely holding onto a job, etc.
That is not some exception.. that is the majority of America now.
In any case, we'll see how this shit plays out... but i dont see it playing out well unless more aggressive measures are put in place.
"controlling population" seems like such an innocent pair of words until you consider the implications. Beware anyone who is able to utter them so casually
i dont disagree... we all saw how it worked in china for several decades.
there are for sure risks and drawbacks.
but i'd argue.. "beware turning a blind eye to the plight of well over 50% of america that can no longer afford to live... and are now gonna be under further pressure from AI."
I think you got another couple decades before it turns into revolution
Unbridled idiocy. China isn't powerful because it has an insanely high population. China applied innovation and capitalism well.
So did Japan.
India and China's population in 2010 weren't that far apart. Look at Bangladesh, Pakistan, Brazil. I am sure they don't feel that having a billion people in each of those countries isn't going to make them switzerland.
this essay needs to be steelmanned better.
Erik (who I like) seems to be strawmanning the opposite sides arguments and brushing them aside casually ("studies show").
If more pople = more geniuses, BRICS share of Nobel proze winners should be x10 what is is. it is not.
I emigrated from India and let me assure you after 35 years there being a Malthusian fan is a easy leap.
Carrying capacity is a real thing and in Asia the case gets made viscerally.
if this essay was read aloud in Bangaladesh/China/India, the speaker would be laughed out of the room.
fair feedback :)
The solution for the West and developed Asia's demographic crisis seems to be that developed countries will take the smartest people from the developing world. Germany has a deal with Kenya for taking skilled workers. Canada is increasing immigration like crazy. We will see talent pour into the West and we will see developing countries reduce their chronic youth unemployment woes.
Here's the Kenyan President openly saying he wants more Kenyans to go abroad:
https://citizen.digital/news/ruto-ill-sign-new-labour-pacts-to-send-more-kenyans-abroad-n318974
This is poetry: “You are the carbon they want to reduce.” Love this whole post! “We are a way for the cosmos to know itself” — how could there be a more noble and virtuous aim than expanding the self-understanding of the cosmos and creating more beautiful life to experience the unfathomly rare treasure of living?
Get breeding, people!
Great essay. Would be even more impactful if you shared your personal experience with family formation. We need both better, ie more positive memes about family formation-- kids are awesome, parenting is joy, family formation is success mode-- and more realistic memes about the supposed benefits of Eat, Pray, Love footloose adventuring and the egg freezing/IVF industrial complex. The other half is Keeper-type mating apps-- ones geared toward family formation vs. ticket taking on the cock carousel that has done more damage to female well-being and opportunities for happiness than the traditional woman-as-chattel patriarchy ever did (not suggesting we go back). I wrote about the fight for family formation here and have recently funded a startup that is building a tech and meme implementation of the essay's main ideas. Check it out-- happy that folks are discussing this-- https://open.substack.com/pub/timparsa/p/fighting-for-family-formation?r=4gw8s&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web