I never said I didn't like the idea. I neither like it nor dislike it. I just meant to point out that the conclusions are in large part a consequence of the the way the question is framed, and the framing is largely cultural determined, in particular by generational beliefs and concerns. Indeed, the entire question of natalism/anti-natalism is generationally specific; older generations would find it an odd thing to have an "ideology" about, notwithstanding small cohorts in earlier generations, or the fact that in the abstract it had long been discussed.

Given all that, it's expected that a large number of people--in particular, those of the same or adjacent generations--would share these beliefs and even analysis; and an even larger number sharing similar framing, even if coming to opposite conclusions.

It's disquieting when you come to the realization that so many of one's beliefs are, in a sense, predetermined, or at least channeled by a cultural experience shared with millions of other people. This of course applies to myself no less than any other. I long ago stopped considering any of my thoughts rare, let alone original. I read half of the literary output of people from my generation and think, "gee, I was saying that 20 years ago"; and the other half, "gee, I was arguing the opposite 20 years ago". Well, of course I was, and so were they.

That's not to say there aren't novel exceptional moments, cases, and people. Just very few and far between. And the whole natalism debate is definitely not the exception.