you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 1 month ago* (7 children)

Except it isn't.

Birth rates are falling but production per person is still increasing.

Reducing the amount of people doesn't solve the unnecessary and wasteful overproduction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Wtf are you talking about? Birth rates are leading directly to reduced population. Do you just disagree with ppl for fun?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (5 children)

    And the reduced population isn't resulting in a reduction in production. Do you not know how to follow a train of logic?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Do you not know how to stay on topic?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (3 children)

    You mean the topic of how reducing our population is claimed to help solve climate change concerns by reducing our resource consumption? You did read the article posted, right?

    You do understand that if we don't reduce production then the consumption isn't reduced, right?

    Seems like you're the one struggling to keep track of what's being discussed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Low birth rates are reducing the population. That's the entire point I made. You just added everything else and then picked a fight over it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments