Maybe, but what's the point ? If science improves shouldn't we aim for less population?
Less people can keep up with more production. Less people means less impact on the environment. Less people means more nature. At least personally I rather have less people on the planet at any given moment.
why production? environmental? nature? Who cares about these things more than caring about humans [and happiness thereof]?
Sure I want less people and more earth to myself too, but if everyone [overall] wants as many free kids as they can afford, how on earth are you going to end up with having less people?
A girl's maximum happiness is directly correlated with the number of children she has. regardless of how much free capital and brainwashing received
> A girl's maximum happiness is directly correlated with the number of children she has. regardless of how much free capital and brainwashing received
Wow that's one interesting statement. I've met many girls that rather not have any kids AT ALL. Are those statistical anomalies or something? Are you implying that being pregnant 100% of the time = ultimate happiness?
Since when did she rather be childless? At birth? (Although girls are notorious at lying to themselves, wouldn't hurt to ask.)
Verily I say thee, it started when she realized how the world outside eden works. Scarcity, money, capitalism, food bills, rent bills, hospital bills, nanny bills, university bills, oh my, if you have as many kids as you want when will you have the time to yourself to ever rest and drink some water?
But you can go to this girl who ''rather not have any kids at all'' and see for yourself that's not true. All you need is to bring along $100 bill printouts equal to fortune-ten market cap to match, or buy them from Iran if she is the numismatic type. Go ask her if you have all this money in the world do you want kids? Then before she replies, flush out the cash and say It's all yours! Not if! Not when! You are Naow a trillionaire! It's all yours! Do you want kids?!
Yepp, now you're seeing. Let me know how many kids she wants. (Certainly it'll be age dependant, with those nearing menopause being sourgraped.)
With replacement rate decreasing from 2.1, even if she is the oddball type that wants only two kids, as long as for every billion of her there's someone who wants more, then we are all set. on the path to 8 trillion and more.
Of course if all else fails, don't say I didn't warn you, that this being earth not eden there will be folks who are actually mental and within a mere dozen-decade uncurable.
Being pregnant is not the point, like how working out is not the point. (These are costs not results.) While it can be negative, it's small compared to its epic takeaway.
For instance energy: petrol -> pollution, nuclear energy-> tchernobil, danger currently in Ukraine with the war, ...
Food : fertilizer -> water pollution and eutrophication
Housing: more home -> less free soil to retain water, insane flooding.
And so on, and so on.
Anyway by the time we reach 8 trillion, a nuclear war surely would have already started and wiped us all