Fantastic idea. 
How old are you? I already started on my third lifetime, but I won’t be volunteering anytime soon, so you first - you might be saving the world.
I saw that movie, Logan’s Run. 
Everybody wants depopulation, but nobody wants to be first in line.
[Original] Star Trek - “The Mark of Gideon”
So “make love, not war” is bad? One leads to population growth and the other lowers it.
And don’t forget: Sometimes, war is the only answer!!!
Don’t forget famine and pestilence.
That’s an unfortunate natural occurrence. I have no problem with the world population.
Here’s a thought: Reduce our birth rate.
When I was in school a professor explained this term ‘cognitive dissonance’. He said it was when two parts of our brains were in conflict… and all the mental gymnastics we do to try to deal with it. He gave the example “Smoking is bad for me… but I enjoy smoking.”
Maybe the ultimate cognitive dissonance for us humans is “There are too many people here for the planet to handle… but we love making and raising babies.”
1 Like
That’s China’s plan.
According to the CIA - yes, that CIA- 105 of 212 countries already birthrates below the natural replacement rate (2.0). I don’t know why the CIA is involved.
1 Like
Let’s look at the projections of world population and age structure diagrams.
According to those in the field world population is believed to peak sometime around 2080 to 2100 at somewhere near but above 10 billion. After which it will begin to slowly fall due to population declines in India and China. It has grown from 2 billion to 8 billion in just 100 years! At the same time atmospheric CO2 has gone from about 310 to about 410ppm and rising.
Comparing Global Population Projections to 2100 (visualcapitalist.com)
Age structure in developed countries like the US and China show populations that indicate a future population decline. While countries in Africa show a population that is increasing rapidly. Here are a few examples.
What the different diagrams indicate.
Nigera
China
USA
I much prefer looking at the data to speculating.
1 Like
Predicting world population in 2080 or 2100 is speculation, IMO. Data-informed speculation to be sure, and it definitely has a greater chance of being closer to reality than uninformed opinion or wishful thinking, but it’s still speculation. There are too many unforeseeable variables to have any confidence that present trends will continue for the next three or four generations.
Yes, you are correct. My bad.
It is a form of speculation based on concrete trends in the current available data. I should have more accurately stated that I prefer speculation based on an analysis of the data by experts in the field than on unsupported speculation lacking such data by people who lack such understanding. Anyone of us could be gone tomorrow, but we tend to make plans based on the probability we will be here lacking any info to the contrary. Some number of us will be proved wrong.
It is a hypothesis based on the mathematical projections from the current data by those that work in the field. This data is pointing to the likely near future outcome. I don’t see long-term predictions made on the current population numbers. Indeed, any number of unforeseen circumstances could change the eventual number with the most likely outcome of going down. Considering that the projections of the rate of sea level rise and global average temperature rise have been happening at a greater rate than was predicted. I speculate given the conservative nature of science the deduction made about population declining is correct. As seen in the above link there is debate over the rate it will happen, but not much about the stage being already set for it to happen based on the demographics.
It’s info compiled by DIA. Pertains to threat analysis.
Si do you think somebody should release a virus to start thinning out the population. We worry about people not wearing a PFD and paddling without immersion gear, while the UN is worrying about reducing the world population to save mother earth, whole scientists try to clone life whe they kill babies. This is deep.
1 Like
Well said.
What those that work on this stuff are saying is the observed current world population demographics are projected to result in a peak of somewhere over 10 billion and then world population will start declining toward the end of this century based on those demographics.
I am not proposing anything like you are suggesting. You seem to be putting those ideas forward. I doubt many would agree or want to do those things or think of them as appropriate solutions.
I personally believe that in becoming educated on the topic allows me to make a more informed decision on any approach that might be seen as a solution.
It must be getting too cold to paddle. 
3 Likes
It’s going to take a lot more than ONE solution to ameliorate human-exacerbated damage. A given solution also does not exclude using other solutions.
More importantly, the fact that someone does not “like” one solution does not constitute a valid reason to give up on making any changes at all. That’s not a reason; that’s an excuse, and a really lame one, especially for those who claim to want to make the world better for their already-existing offspring.
Conserving resources harms nothing and costs nothing more than a bit of effort to make a difference, however tiny that is on an individual scale.
3 Likes