[DoingIsLearning]

It's game theory the same as pollution.

"We" can do whatever we want but if not "everyone" is doing it then the impact is fairly limited.

You would be better off having children and just consuming less than making a grave decision that impacts your whole family tree for the sake of a Humanity collective that likely will not be making the same "sacrifice".

[CalRobert]

I don't see how a two-child family is a sacrifice, really. But regardless, it seems like people have fewer children by choice as they become wealthier, have better access to education and birth control, etc.

How many families are large because the person who had to be pregnant had no real say in the matter?

[nelox]

Er … for those potential parents already living at the economic margins, where having a child would be a demonstrably poor decision, then just having children and consuming less would help them or their children how?

Indeed, who is to say that the perpetuation of one’s family tree is at all desirable or necessary?

Maybe the best outcome is not to play the game at all.