Thanks for the great question! I think part of your question moves towards another very important point: growth of consumption is as much, if not more, of a problem than population growth. In actuality, both are serious issues. Some amount of growth of material wealth in many “developing countries” is necessary in order to break free of what Keynes called the “economic problem,” or what I always associate with the first two levels of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. After that point more material wealth doesn’t actually improve well-being.

However, if consumption growth continues it will wreck the planet. At the same time, continued population growth, on the macro-level, will always bring about the same result. Both consumption and population growth need to be stabilized. When you think about the two together you might reach the conclusion that population growth in the “developed” countries is more impactful to the planet and the rest of us than developing countries, because our consumption is so much higher. In truth, all life is equally important and it is a morally reprehensibly, I think, to value one live more or less based on something like possible consumption.

Does that help answer your question?

Cheers,
Joshua

well,

Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll take them off.

Cheers,
Joshua

I don’t think they belong on the list.