[kmlx]

> A shrinking population is only bad for people with a vested interest in growth; investors and employers, but good for everybody else

a shrinking population is a disaster overall. productivity goes down, more elderly, social services strained, smaller taxable cohorts. the needs will still be there, the money and the people to solve them won’t.

[jmoak3]

Yeah exactly. What the original commentor is hoping for is a reset to a previous point in time. Which would be nice in many of ways they've outlined, but isn't possible. Imagine if a large corrupted and bloated city could simply not be large, corrupted, or bloated.

In real life we've seen when such a city loses people or revenue, the trauma of the pullback is devastating and the bloat and corruption do not simply go away. Detroit, 1970s NYC after the suburban flight, and the people clinging to shrinking regions of Japan come to mind.

As our countries have a population pullback wealth will shrink, corners will be cut, innovation will slow, and likely more coal than ever will be burned.

[webdood90]

Let it burn. I'm not bringing kids into this mess.

Climate change, war, pollution. An endless list of problems due to humanity's greed. There is no changing the trajectory at this point. Human's are in denial about our future but we've already laid our beds.

[Ancalagon]

I believe the phrase is "made our beds" FYI.

No opinion one way or the other with regards to kids/no kids. Just thought I'd point it out :)

[ulrashida]

In fairness, it may be that the beds are being laid to prepare for the burning that was mentioned.

[Ancalagon]

Laid with firewood? I think for either interpretation "made" is appropriate.

[codealot]

Source?

[matt3D]

Productivity as we currently measure it, yes.

It seems we're trending (hopefully) to a more sustainable future. Consumerism as we know if today may not exist in the near future. If the only thing we care about is producing Food, Housing and Art/Culture; we will have plenty of people.

[Qem]

*more unassisted elderly.