you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 13 points 2 months ago (7 children)

I mean that's a valid option too, instead of "line must go up ๐Ÿ“ˆ", eternal growth mindset. Could be more sustainable too to allow populations to shrink.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [โ€“] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    The usually converts a lot of mindsets from "let's build the future" into "fight for dwindling resources" and results in a quite toxic community.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [โ€“] 7 points 2 months ago

    I think it would be healthy to try and find an acceptable balance where you are able to keep up the lifestyle and still have people comfortable. The idea that the economy must always be growing, profits must always be higher and we must always have more and newer stuff is going to ruin the planet.

  • source
  • parent
  • [โ€“] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Sure, but it generates a lot of problems.

    The biggest problem: How can the older generation live if the younger generation can't support them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [โ€“] 10 points 2 months ago*

    It's a problem right now because the whole system has been built for eternally bigger profits and eternal growth. And it will be an issue while there's a big elderly population. But that's an issue right now and in the future, with the mindset of sustainability it won't really be an issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • [โ€“] 6 points 2 months ago

    The thing is with a smaller population, you still have all the stuff developed for a country with a much larger population. So you do not have to put work into building more housing, transport infrastructure and so forth. That work can then be used to support the elderly. The bigger part of that is that less workers means the ratio between capital and workers shifts in favour of the workers. So they can ask for higher wages.

  • source
  • parent