• Bye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is why I get so mad when people say “we don’t have an overpopulation problem, we have a resource allocation problem”.

    No. There are not supposed to be this many fucking humans. Where the fuck are the animals supposed to live???

    We need to return to preindustrial population levels so the animals can too

    • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      If you had half as many humans in the world, but they all lived in suburbs, it would be much worse for the environment than having twice as many humans but they all live in cities.

      Compare America to India. If Americans lived the way Indians do, the population would be absolutely fine. So if you want to solve overpopulation problems, stop the American style suburbs before you worry about the actual population.

      • Bye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Sure but all those humans need an insane amount of farmland that dwarfs the amount of land they need for housing. And that’s ignoring meat consumption.

        With a huge population, beef consumption is insane and is destroying the world.

        With a small population, it isn’t a big deal.

        • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          That amount of farmland is a lot less if you’re not raising livestock and throwing out perfectly good food because it isn’t profitable. A vegan socialist society has a much higher population ceiling than a carnist capitalist society.