Hacker News Reader

Comment by FrankyHollywood | Hacker News Reader

All these comments mentioning cutting down on energy. It will help a bit, but the real problem is there are just to many people on earth.

A world wide one-child policy like it used to exist in China [1] would be a real solution in keeping earth a pleasant place to live.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

View on HN

A better solution would be if most people turn vegetarian [1]

https://news.berkeley.edu/2022/02/01/global-elimination-of-m...

First world countries already have 1 child per family with the rest of the world also moving that direction as they grow wealthier. This policy wouldn't actually do much to help and would likely cause massive unintended consequences like China is dealing with right now.

Yes I know putting it into practice by law is not practical or even wanted. I just don't believe climate changes significantly improves by having electric cars and replacing old light bulbs with led. We need more deepcutting measures.

Either have less kids or power the world nuclear and all eat vegan (no methane producing animals), or accept the new climate reality and deal with the heat or whatever. Just don't pretend we are doing a good job at the moment because we don't.

Obviously putting humanity below replacement reproduction eventually causes it to disappear, then the planet will recover from whatever we did after a few million years.

But I don’t see how that will make it a better place to live for us. We know that birth rates already fall with higher standards of living, so if you want fewer kids just develop those countries where the birth rate is still high.

Judging by the demographic changes caused by China's one-child policy, I think your 'solution' looks a lot like a recipe for World War III.

What % of this warming is due to humans? Aren't we exiting an ice age...?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com