• maketotaldestr0i@lemm.eeM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Your argument that overconsumption is the culprit but not population doesn’t make sense when the equation is (Population X Consumption)= Environmental impact.

    There is no consumption without the population.

    And virtually all the published everything about overpopulation is fully onboard that first world consumption needs to come down and 3rd world needs to go up to be fair.

    Why does everyone think talking about overpopulation means you are hitler looking for lebensraum?

    • xapr@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why does everyone think talking about overpopulation means you are hitler looking for lebensraum?

      Because that’s exactly what it sounds like the path that people are alluding to when they mention overpopulation before or especially without overconsumption. I used to think that overpopulation was the problem too, but I have come to my senses.

      • maketotaldestr0i@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        yeah but there is no consumption without population. Pop*consumption= environmental impact.

        Talking about population doesn’t imply ignoring consumption as the best target for mitigating the problem. But the market will do that as prices rise and kick more population out of the “consumption is viable” cohort. unfortunately the market starts with the poorest and least consuming