And why is it desirable to have a population of 8 billion that needs such farms for survival, instead of having a stable population of 1 billion that could be sustained by more future-proof agricultural techniques?
I find most people who espouse your views typically don’t because the people they are always imagining dying/killing/banning from having babies are usually in the third-world, or at least very far away. They don’t imagine the very real killing, wars, etc. that would have to take place to forcibly sterilize people.
I don’t think organic agriculture is such an important end that we should render 7/8 of the population dead or infertile so that we can transition to organic.
The greenest people are north Americans (excluding Mexico) and Europe. They just so happen to not have any kids.
The solution is to put the economic burden of pollution onto those that cause it the most and right now the biggest burdens are on western states who do the most already to greenify their economies.
And don't post the innane," they're poor and need to burn coal to get ahead!". India is the worst offender with dumping plastic in the ocean. China is even worse with industrial pollutants destroying what good land they had.
The 3rd world needs to be brought to heel if climate change is to be stopped.
This is just reskinned eco-racialist rhetoric. We do not need to reduce our population to 1 billion by bringing billions of people in poorer countries ‘to heel’ via forced sterilization or killlings.
Until people like accept that reality either by visiting those countries to see how bad it really is, nothing will ever change.
Your "basic understanding" is certainly that.
FWiW tv and education are great at reducing population growth, Hans Rosling presentations of the past decades show the high correlation between these, women's rights, and reducing population growth.
Mitigating the effects of AGW is multi pronged, population will peak and fall, and then stabilise, this is already projected. Reducing insulating gas emmissions comes with changes in behaviour; alternate energy, reduced consumption, etc.
Doomsayers don't have to go full genocidal in their thoughts, you may consider winding back on that kind of simplistic thinking.
have a good one
"Reducing population" is phrased as an active control of population numbers. Populations fluctuate by other means than just genocidal ones, and I made no mention of one billion as a taget.
Do better.
there are real problems, you identify yourself as a greater contributor than the average global person, then you imply that others in this discussion feel superior to people in “those countries”
maybe stop blowing the consumption of “the marginal Chinese child out of the water”?
think globally, act locally
Given the precipitous drops in fertility in the developed world, I'd say that this is happening.
Just educate people on sexual health and offer contraceptives. It works.
also, to address the sentiments in your posts in general, if you’re against government intervention in farming, go ahead and give up farm subsidies, subsidies to oil companies, etc.
be consistent at least. lots of fingers on the scale, most of which prop up farmers and plastic producers.