[ambicapter]

You don't have to be an "extinction apologist" or whatever to think that we'll probably solve the problem before we go from 7 BILLION people to not enough humans for healthy genetic diversity. We've rescued animal species from extinction with populations of <100.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

>that we'll probably solve the problem before we go from 7 BILLION people to not enough humans for

This just goes to show how little you've ever considered the problem. I don't think you're stupid (probably), so let me get you started...

It's not "from 7 billion to not enough", because right now we don't have 7 billion. We only have the generation(s) that are from 0 to 40 years old... everyone older doesn't even count. 80 yr olds and 55 yr olds aren't potential parents.

We will still have many billions of people even once we become functionally extinct, because you were counting everyone even the octogenarians, when you should've been counting the people who mattered in this regard.

>We've rescued animal species from extinction with populations of <100.

But there's no "us" to rescue us in that manner, and we can't do it ourselves. Why? Because doddering senile geezers don't have the ambition, marbles, or energy to do such a thing and those are the only people who would be left at that point. Not to mention that any such rescue would turn us into franken-people, no thanks. We should all be terrified of the science fiction dreams of artificial wombs and gestation chambers and so forth because just as those might be used for good things, the CCP and North Korea will use them to churn out armies of replicants.

You really are the extinction apologist you think you're not.

[leoedin]

I think it's actually quite likely that quite a few "dominant" cultures - both in terms of nations and groups within nations - will effectively die out.

But humanity almost certainly won't? Why? Because there are sub-groups within humanity who have much higher fertility rates. As long as there are groups of people which are large enough to have viable genetic diversity, and recognise that a high birth rate is crucial for the continued existence of their culture, there will be humans.

Realistically, that means the decline of western liberal ideas and the growth of more extreme religious groups.

[ponector]

>>This just goes to show how little you've ever considered the problem

It's not really considered a problem. A real problem is a wellbeing of the old people, that's why it is financed better then wellbeing of future generations.

Cut elderly support and make a free childcare and education, huge tax rebates for each child, etc.

A huge pile of government debt is another indicator that future generations are fucked.

[pyuser583]

We’ve never come up with a way to correct this. No country has reversed course. That’s troubling.

When it comes to animals - species that refuse to breed have a tendency to go extinct.

[TFYS]

There are some cultures that have sustainable birthrates. Those cultures will become dominant over time and the problem will be solved.