|
|
|
|
|
by philwelch
6196 days ago
|
|
Depending on the rate of globalization and how sustainable our use of natural resources are by then, we may indeed be facing a population decline by the time life extension comes out. This seems incredible, but rich countries have much lower birthrates than poor countries. So if globalization turns poor countries into rich countries, it will solve the overpopulation problem and move the world below replacement rate. The economic benefit to life extension is that you can work longer. If life extension works the way we think it will (by reducing the aging process), then it will also extend physical youth, giving us more productive years without the loss of productivity over time that comes with age (but with the gain in productivity over time that comes with experience and wisdom!) Finally, it won't mean immortality, because it'll only fix old age. People will still die from suicide, homicide, and accident. Since there is a non-zero probability of these things happening to someone, the life expectancy will be more of an expected value than an expiration date, with some people dying at 1, some at 100, and some at 1000. It'll still be possible for people to have kids. This will probably lead people to adopt an extremely risk-averse culture, and things like casual sex and automobiles will be the first to go. (The risk of dying in childbirth may be high enough to reduce birth rate in such a culture.) That, combined with a slower rate of generational replacement, will cause a very conservative culture in total. |
|