Literally the opposite of this is true. Not having kids is one of the single best things you can do for the planet.
(Still want to raise a child? Adopt! There are so many kids out there looking for good homes and people who will love and care for them)
Not entirely accurate. Shit hits the fan before this changes too much and we are in much debt. Also infrastructure is somewhat of a fixed cost. I.e. being fewer people does not reduce infrastructure emissions.
Antinatalism isn’t ab answer to the problem, but might be a reasonable reaction.
That being said I do not want to advocate for having more children or put the blame for the systemic issues on the individuals suffering from them.
some infrastructure, but by no means all. But I think my stance has always been closer to “if they wanted me to bring in additional players, they should’ve made the game more fun to play”
Population decline will be the socio-economic epoch which finally puts an end to obligate growth capitalism, and the initial demographic crisis will force us to reprioritize how we use resources and technology to support aging populations. Historical materialism goes brrrrrr.
Refusing to make children for the capitalist machine is just good praxis.
For the time being, most countries can get a younger population by letting in immigrants (who are statistically younger). Would probably result in a softer landing than otherwise.
Debt and money are make-believe anyway. Just tokens in a game we play called capitalism.
I’m not sure about the infrastructure claim. Generally, if infrastructure is used less, it requires less maintenance.
50% of all habital land is already being used by humans and being degraded, which doesn’t seem sustainable, especially since so much of the world still lives in poverty. World population doubles every 61 years, so it seems like it would be nearly impossible to stay on the current trajectory for much longer.
Please consider kids in foster care before adopting. Adoption is a huge problem in the USA and doesn’t always consider the child’s needs over the potential buyers. ); <3
the thing is, while not having babies is good for the planet, it is really bad or even a huge crisis for the economy depending on how it is set up as most economies are set up so that you people take care of the old
Don’t mind if I do.
I’m sure what humanity needs is checks notes more humans, because we dont have enough problems .
i looked them up, this is a DIAPER AD
Ok someone give me this lady’s id I just wanna talk, just talk… ಥ_ಥ
Elon musk is just firing more and more people. What he want these kids to be? Steve Jobless?
He and his dad have a pregnancy thing. They both have some weird breeding fetish
He wants people to give him money, not the other way around.
OBEY. CONSUME. REPRODUCE.
oh i’m having sex, non procreative, that is
We could just let people with babies immigrate into the country easily instead of forcing people already here to have extra.
Oh wait that’s not the right kind of baby? Weird.
this is really funny but I can’t think of why
edit: despite what lemmy wants it to be, it’s probably got nothing to do with capitalism or communism or any other systems of government (beyond ‘haha billboard tell us to have sex’)
These are apparently ads for a diaper company with an explicitly anti-abortion political agenda, because we live in a dystopian hell scape where such things apparently exist.
I feel like at this point you could just do the opposite of whatever old musky says and you’d be doing pretty alright for yourself.
Best I can do is vehement antinatalism
It’s also one of the best ways to have a giiiaaant personal CO2 footprint (through your children, clever!), so get on it!
Make more little humans that destroy the planet even more and consume shit!
Fun fact, Lemmy actually supports subscript, so you can do CO2. Surround in single tildes (as opposed to double tildes, for strike-out) to do it.
they say have more babies then cheer as families drown in the rio grande
looks at sign.
Looks at woman holding it
“Alright, let’s go.”
