• OctopusNemeses@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    4 days ago

    When the population was predicted to explode into the 21st century, the news said this was a big problem. Now the population is expected to gradually decline. The news is saying this is a big problem.

        • onionguy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          That can’t be true, everything the onion publishes, goes through me first, I would’ve seen that, trust me, I’m an expert. So who is spreading this?

      • qarbone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Not all news, per se, but I do recall seeing reporting on how a good handful of countries are trying to combat falling birth rates. Like in Far East and Far North countries.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Booms have market opportunity, and busts have market opportunity.

      That said, having too many people to do the work is a lot less dangerous than not enough people to do the work.

      The bust comes with a high risk of a total economic collapse. Those houses get cheap, but food, sanitary, and energy security are at risk. Living in a rotting infrastructure is very different than living in an expanding but underdeveloped infrastructure.

      Leveling out or a slow population decline would be good in some scenarios. If we’re going from 2.5:1 down to 0.25:1, you’ll end up with another boomer wave, pissed off at the government, ripe for scenarios that make today’s problems seem like an annoying party.

        • rumba@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          What happens in the rural areas when the need for grocery stores halves, all the walmarts pull out, we have to re-invent logistics. I expect people will either have to go back to making everything themselves, or they’ll have to bunch back together around resources.

          • ageedizzle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah. But people won’t change willingly. A lot of the suburbs around my city are pretty rich areas. I don’t expect those people to willingly move to the denser inner city anytime soon. More likely they’ll petition city hall to keep their subdivisions running until the city goes bankrupt from the financial burden of supporting a subdivision that does not bring in enough property taxes to support itself

            • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              “Nicer” cities are growing in almost all parts of the world, right? If anything, rural infrastructure will dwindle as people move to the cities for opportunities and amenities.