Putting my nerd hat on, I could see there being some sort of equilibrium on a large enough timeline that we vacillate between above and below, populationwise. Population itself becomes the overarching economic cycle as we swing between periods of rampant capitalism and whatever replaces it. It does not appear we would learn the first time.
This is, of course, all assuming we don’t roast or blow ourselves up first.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !news@beehaw.org
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Never mind it being too expensive to have kids, it’s too expensive to exist. Population aging is just an obvious consequence of that.
Putting my nerd hat on, I could see there being some sort of equilibrium on a large enough timeline that we vacillate between above and below, populationwise. Population itself becomes the overarching economic cycle as we swing between periods of rampant capitalism and whatever replaces it. It does not appear we would learn the first time.
This is, of course, all assuming we don’t roast or blow ourselves up first.
I think the safe money is on roasting for the foreseeable future unfortunately