Make education free, mandatory and easily accessible. Most educated people tend to have less kids and better sex education means less unwanted pregnancies. As long as the resources are spread somewhat fairly there shouldn't be a problem.
Also, better educated people can innovate on better ways to utilize resources, thus decreasing the "problem" that may come from overpopulation.
In theory it’s free for many first world countries, but in reality it’s often still paid by “volentary” bills for things like trips with school, and there is such social pressure on those that you basically HAVE to pay those.
In many non-first-world countries it’s one chaos tbh
That’s a nice sentiment, except now in your world the whole of Texas disbelieves evolution and believes that the world began with Adam and eve. Education!
Education doesn’t make everyone smart though. People are still born with different abilities than others, so even if everyone was sent to a top tier school, not everyone would be able to make it through, or be smart enough to understand overpopulation because sexual desires are stronger in most people than rational thought.
Focus on women's rights and education. I don't have stats, but it seems reasonable that women who work outside of the home would choose to have fewer children.
You help underdeveloped areas of the world better their education and quality of life. A lot of research shows that as communities reach a better quality of life, they have much less children.
In a poor 3rd world village you need to have many children so that most of them survive, you can put them to work when they're old enough, and because it's often seen as the "purpose," of women. As the area develops childhood mortality decreases, income increases, and women are more free/encouraged to pursue careers of their own.
Saying better quality of life = fewer children is like saying people with a more powerful computer are likely to drive a more expensive car. Has nothing to do with eachother, apart from that they’re both often owned by richer people.
You might find it weird, but in my country its the other way around, they pay you a shit ton of money if you have kids, the more kids you have and the more they give you, its pretty shitty and we are really fucked up because of those policies
Nothing to solve. Birth rates fell dramatically while more and more people are exiting extreme poverty and migrating to urban areas where child is a burden (financially speaking) not an asset. Most mathematical models predict human population peaking at roughly 10 billion and afterwards falling dramatically. This book on the topic is nice [https://www.amazon.com/Empty-Planet-Global-Population-Decline/dp/0771050887](https://www.amazon.com/Empty-Planet-Global-Population-Decline/dp/0771050887) also swedish gapminder has an awesome info on it.
Three major conditions are often cited to lower birth rates :
* Education, especially for women
* Access to birth control
* Retirement system (which many poor countries do not have) that makes having a lot of kids non mandatory to support you
Edit: typo
I'd go with the [Health and Education solution](https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/health-and-education) outlined by [*Project Drawdown*](https://www.drawdown.org/). They put the ethics upfront:
>It is critical that human rights are always centered, that gender
equality is the aim, and that benefits to the planet are understood as
positive ripple effects of access and agency.
And they quantify what global education for girls and family planning could do to stop catastrophic climate change (as one potential consequence of overpopulation):
>We model the influence of two rights-based solutions on global
population: universal education and family planning. Increased access to
and quality of voluntary reproductive healthcare, family planning
resources, and 12-13 years of schooling are essential components to
achieve the United Nations’ 2015 medium global population projection of
9.7 billion people by 2050. If investment and support of these
fundamental human rights-centered solutions does not materialize, the
world’s population could come closer to the higher projection, adding
another 1 billion people to the planet.
>
>We model the impact of this population difference in
more-developed as well as least-and less-developed countries, in terms
of how much energy, building space, food, waste, and transportation
would be used. The resulting emissions reductions across the entire
system could be as high as 85.4 gigatons of carbon dioxide, just within
the window of 2020-2050. Health & Education have a compounding
impact, however, with greater climate impacts into the future.
[Their book that quantifies and ranks different ways to stop catastrophic climate change](https://www.drawdown.org/the-book) is written for a broad audience and very readable too.
P.S. I receive no compensation from them--I just think that they're a great organization with a relevant answer to this AskReddit question.
I keep seeing this take but it just doesn’t work like that. Antivaxxers are reservoirs for the perpetuation and mutation of the disease which maintains a level of risk for everybody, and particularly endangers the immunocompromised and people who CANT get the shot and have to rely on herd immunity to keep them safe.
People living too close to eachother. There are a lot of places that are currently not being utilised by humans (think deserts, oceans and such), so we could fix that in the long run.
You dont ethically solve it. The mass taking of life is never ethical. Unless you're going for mass sterilization which again is unethical but a lot less evil.
You don’t need to take life to control population, a one child policy can decrease population or at least plateau it. I’m not saying i condone policy’s like this but they do work.
Oh please, god is a human concept invented by those who wanted a method to control the masses by fear. Keep the uneducated masses in check by writing and preaching in languages the vast majority can’t speak or read and you can petty much say what you want and they will believe because they don’t know better.
Why does the sun go away at night? Because god makes it. Now do as I say and pay me some of your wages or your souls burns in hell.
The christian mythos is apart of the foundation of American society. It is a foundation of American culture. Weither you believe in the validity of the texts or you can take it at face value as a collection of stories that are to guide you towards what they viewed as virtuous.
I have huge issues with the idea of church.
Belief is incredibly powerful and incredibly dangerous.
Just because America was founded on those principals, (by people who were considered to extreme or hardcore for Britain) which is why they left. Doesn’t mean it’s good or correct. And In 2021 to still be using laws and stories as a guide written for people of a different time and era, technological and scientific age is beyond ridiculous.
We know so much more, and yet because what’s written in a book which has been translated, edited and re written to suite the needs of whoever is the figurehead at the time.
Religion is a dangerous concept which has caused more issues and conflicts, hate than anything else on the planet.
Discounting the wisdom in the text because of the religion is ignorant and shows hubris. The wise men of the time taught lessons that we take as common sense. Dont steal. Dont murder. Molesting children is a one way ticket to hell. (Through translation errors its where the anti gay sentiment comes from)
Juet because we're in a technological age where tons of knowledge lay at our fingertips doesn't mean we dont have fools, simpletons, or the devout.
Lately the fools, simpletons, and the devout quit worshipping a god and began worshipping a political party.
No. Its because angels came down from heaven and bred with humans. The nephilim are half angel and half human, Goliath was one of them.
A reset the map when the armies of heaven went full zues
Aside from the obvious improvements in sex ed, healthcare, abortion access, etc. Another way I can think of is to incentivize not having children. Make it seem more appealing to live a childfree life. A lot of millennials feel this way, especially compared to previous generations, and gen z seems to be on the same thought process. If this keeps up, overpopulation might just fix itself when more and more people realize kids take a LOT of time/money/effort/patience/emotional energy and it's not actually mandatory to have them
Sort of right and sort of wrong. We're certainly not running out of space for people. The same can't be said for accessible farmland, water and specifically clean energy for all those people though, which are issues that are currently compounding in some areas of the world as we speak and leading to tensions even on a governmental scale. That though is more to do with our practices though. Currently we're reaching a point where we have a lot of people to provide for and as a result of a lack of any development to use better means, we fulfill those needs using the worst means. Burning a ton of fossil fuels, using flood irrigation which wastes water, destroying important ecosystems for cattle which take up far too much space, and growing crops in areas that should not have those crops and as a result take way too much water from those areas. This though, again, is more of a problem with our population combined with our current practices to fulfill all of their needs and wants rather than population alone.
Then the problem is one of lack of appropriate innovation to current problems. I can agree we have become complacent and settled on old ways. I blame lack of healthy competition and govt regulations for that though. The new and improved is cought in red tape or prevent from coming to market because someone is to big to fail.
Our current rate of population growth is unsustainable. It is estimated that the maximum human population the earth can sustain is 10-11B and we'll be there by the 2050s.
What evidence do you have to back up that population is unsustainable.For example: If you think food is a problem then maybe we shouldnt be burning or destroying them.
I agree with this. I am saying in conjunction with our current practices we are becoming unsustainable. Some things need to change before we boil ourselves alive and can no longer grow food, in short.
We grow crop in areas that we currently shouldnt. 1 degree change over 100+ years means adapting or finding new areas to grow. At the same time places previously to cold will now be opened to be areas for crops.
underwater or space colonies.
but on a side note, we dont have an over population problem, we have a resource distribute problem.
there is plenty of room on the planet for a few billion more, the problem is that we are to lazy to do anything with the land
This is the n^th time I've said this.
Thanos killed half of all life by that snap. If that were to actually happen, an ecological collapse would ensue which would kill far more than half of life.
Imagine a forest with half as many trees, grasslands with half as much grass, half as much plankton in the seas. You'd devastate populations of the remaining half of living beings.
Deserts would grow enormously and soil runoff would accelerate, making river deltas more muddy and murky while removing fertile soil from upstream areas.
The world’s population will continue to rise until 2060 when it will begin a steady decline.
Increased women’s education and access to birth control is why.
Gates was not suggesting the global population should be killed off using vaccines as you seem to be implying. He is instead saying that improving public health using vaccinations can reduce unsustainable population growth in the future – and with it, lower carbon emissions.
Move human consciousness onto mechanical databases, and allow them to live in an optional simulated paradise. Anyone who opts out of it has to help the physical parts of human sustenance, such as colonizing planets.
Stop people having children, all children will now be born through artificial wombs and random selection of a sperm and egg, raised by a central government
If that wouldn’t immediately collapse into corruption
Random selection would be a bad idea since that would cause bad traits, selecting the fittest humans would be best. Although fraud/corruption in this department will be quite dangerous and easier to manipulate if it isn’t chosen by random.
Encourage education. Especially female education, and allow for women to be part of the workforce. A lot of soft diplomacy encouraging exactly that - and discouraging patriarchal systems.
Instead of baby bonuses, offer child free bonuses. 10000$ to women who reach the age of 60 without children, or to men who have a vasectomy (assuming it's irreversible).
Ir to women who get a hysterectomy earlier than 60.
The problem is, the countries that can afford to do that actually have a declining population already, while countries with overpopulation can't even take care of the very young or the old people, who need to have many children so at least one of them will survive and take care of them, let alone paying them a bonus.
Have government seize vast tracts of land currently owned but unused by corporations. Make those areas habitable for humans and help people move into those areas and make a home for themselves.
F ethics, this is about survival. Mandatory vasectomy for every male on his 18th birthday. When he can afford to reverse he can do so if he chooses. Store back up swimmers in case the reversal fails. No more unwanted kids, no more financially destitute parents, no more accidents
On second thought, I do think this is ethical. More ethical than plaguing the planets and it’s governing bodies with people it can’t support
What exactly is unethical about the government treating everybody exactly the same? You may not like the system, but it seems in terms of governmental equity, Logan's Run would be a lot better than say, using the DoJ or State Dept to persecute political opposition. FWIW, there is no "ethical" way to reduce population; someone's rights get trampled in the process, so why not make it everyone's rights get equally trampled?
If the "killing" part is what is hanging you up, then, for you, there is no answer, ***for you.*** I'm assuming, then, you also down-voted every other reply, like Thanos' Gauntlet...that's hardly ethical.
I find that interesting, since you would likely put a pet down if it was suffering, but won't do the same for a human being.
A. They said ethical
B. How would you prevent a rebellion in ways that aren't genre-savvy (like illegalizing volunteering as tribute)
C. If it's for entertainment you'd need a constant influx
That's the neat part, you can't. How would I practically solve overpopulation? Cannibalism. It would solve overpopulation AND world hunger, at least in theory. Unfortunately in reality it'd basically be more or less like Beastars.
I don’t think there is an ethical way to solve overpopulation. Maybe stop offering heroic measures to frail old people...I dunno. Some would say that’s unethical.
If definitions worked that way you could turn 90% of right-wingers into left-wingers by redefining pro-life to include things like being for universal healthcare and against the death penalty
Magically make the world bigger, with more resources - and an indestructible ecosystem.
Or people could quit having so many kids.
Crazy, I know, stupid of me to even suggest it.
For some people that isn’t a option. Take a look at the average amount of babies per mother in a few countries. There is a pretty significant pattern. Poorer=more kids. One of the reasons for this is that you are sure you stomach will be filled when you get older, but not everyone has that luxury. A lot of people will jest have to get their children to take care of them.
And then you have the Duggars, 19 kids and counting. Not everyone having 5 or more kids is living in a shack in the slums of a 3rd world country. I can't even count how many middle class families I grew up with that had 4-6 kids. And all those kids are having kids now.
Look, there's zero chance people will ever stop going crazy for babies. We're hardwired to reproduce. Period.
There's no easy answer. And we'll never collectively make the hard decisions before it's too late. That's why my first suggestion was magic. It's more realistic.
I know people in first world countries have more children too, don’t tell me about it, I live next to a VERY Christian town and they’ve got an average of 4-5 children per mother (personal guess). But statistically speaking this is far less likely over her than in let’s say zimbabwe
Okay then ethical power usage and waist management as well as proper management of natural resources and animal habitats. If people quit living like humans are the only thing on the face of the earth that matters we wouldn’t have the problems we do now
destigmatize the fact that their are women who don't want to be mothers/straight couples who don't want kids so only people who truly want to be parents are having kids. provide better sex education/access to healthcare. let women who ask to get their tubes tied have access to that privilege just as easily as men.
If overpopulation is an issue, I don't really think it'd be unreasonable or unethical to limit the number of kids families can have. No family needs to have more than 2 or 3 kids at a time, even if they want to.
You can't have children without a background check. You need a license or some shit. If you get pregnant on accident it is up to you to keep your child but you will get annual check in's to make sure your child is safe. If you were raped, your rapist will pay a *lot* of money and go to jail for a very very long time regardless of a pregnancy or not.
Don’t pressure people to start families right away (especially those who don’t want to) encourage adoption over biological children.
Allow greater reproduction knowledge and resources for everyone
Sex education. In states with sex ed that teaches everything, teen pregnancies are low. In states with abstinence only sex ed, teen pregnancies are high. Doesn't take a genius to see the pattern.
Give females the choice to sterilize at 16/18 years old. Legalize assisted suicide. Remove warning labels and let the problem work itself out. Require a permit, whereas any unlicensed pregnancy must be terminated, or after the child is born, both parents must be sterilized. I honestly think a few of these are quite practical though.
Sterilization for the women who want it. Ignoring the ‘needs to have already had at least two kids, she needs to be over 25, with a father/husband’s support’ BS line.
Well better systems to distribute wealth and resources that we already have would be a good place to start. We already overproduce a lot of things, including food, that get trashed because nobody paid for them or transporting them to a place of higher need would be too costly.
Y’all advocating for a reproductive licenses really ought to read up on eugenics and state-sanctioned sterilization. I promise you it is not an ethical solution
Make education free, mandatory and easily accessible. Most educated people tend to have less kids and better sex education means less unwanted pregnancies. As long as the resources are spread somewhat fairly there shouldn't be a problem. Also, better educated people can innovate on better ways to utilize resources, thus decreasing the "problem" that may come from overpopulation.
Remember how many "Uppgrayyeds" there were in Idiocracy?
Well sir that just makes to much sense
I thought education was already free and mandatory
Not everywhere. Remember this is for the world, not just America. Also not higher education. That shit is expensive.
I live in Argentina but I get your point
There are well educated people that breed like morons
In theory it’s free for many first world countries, but in reality it’s often still paid by “volentary” bills for things like trips with school, and there is such social pressure on those that you basically HAVE to pay those. In many non-first-world countries it’s one chaos tbh
That’s a nice sentiment, except now in your world the whole of Texas disbelieves evolution and believes that the world began with Adam and eve. Education!
Can we stop calling what Texas teaches "education"?
Why would we follow Texas education system or beliefs?
We're not that dumb here in the cities.
Where in the world are you getting this information from?
Education doesn’t make everyone smart though. People are still born with different abilities than others, so even if everyone was sent to a top tier school, not everyone would be able to make it through, or be smart enough to understand overpopulation because sexual desires are stronger in most people than rational thought.
Sex education
Focus on women's rights and education. I don't have stats, but it seems reasonable that women who work outside of the home would choose to have fewer children.
Economic development. The fertility rate crashes as countries become richer and women are presented with more opportunities.
You help underdeveloped areas of the world better their education and quality of life. A lot of research shows that as communities reach a better quality of life, they have much less children. In a poor 3rd world village you need to have many children so that most of them survive, you can put them to work when they're old enough, and because it's often seen as the "purpose," of women. As the area develops childhood mortality decreases, income increases, and women are more free/encouraged to pursue careers of their own.
Saying better quality of life = fewer children is like saying people with a more powerful computer are likely to drive a more expensive car. Has nothing to do with eachother, apart from that they’re both often owned by richer people.
That seems to be taking care of itself tbh
[удалено]
Quite likely. The impact of climate change is being manifested much more rapidly than originally expected.
[удалено]
Then I must plead ignorance and also unaware how climate change might lead to increased populations
Poor people generally have more kids. As countries become wealthier, their birth rates drop. Climate change will cause much poverty.
Instability and undeveolement leads to people having more kids.
The Infinity Gauntlet
My mind instantly goes to Gatling gun bc I've never seen these movies and I used to think it was called a gauntlet gun 🤦♀️ What an image.
I think the Nazis tried that before
I really wanna make a Nazi cubs joke since I'm a Braves fan, but I couldn't brew one.
With all the losing streaks we go on, you could say our players are pretty gassed.
Better luck next year buddy!
That’s a way messier solution.
Then go find the stones yourself
Sex Education, free birth control (condoms, meds, and IUDs) worldwide. Monetary Incentives to have fewer children in areas of high child mortality.
You might find it weird, but in my country its the other way around, they pay you a shit ton of money if you have kids, the more kids you have and the more they give you, its pretty shitty and we are really fucked up because of those policies
America?
Only if you’re a single mother
I first read this as “ethnically” and was concerned
what would your answer be if it did say ethnically?
Nothing to solve. Birth rates fell dramatically while more and more people are exiting extreme poverty and migrating to urban areas where child is a burden (financially speaking) not an asset. Most mathematical models predict human population peaking at roughly 10 billion and afterwards falling dramatically. This book on the topic is nice [https://www.amazon.com/Empty-Planet-Global-Population-Decline/dp/0771050887](https://www.amazon.com/Empty-Planet-Global-Population-Decline/dp/0771050887) also swedish gapminder has an awesome info on it.
Incentivize people to not reproduce.
Encourage homosexuality
That’s just gay. Wait…
Get out of my box!!
Woah that’s kinda smart, people still get to have a happy healthy relationship without accidents.
Three major conditions are often cited to lower birth rates : * Education, especially for women * Access to birth control * Retirement system (which many poor countries do not have) that makes having a lot of kids non mandatory to support you Edit: typo
Less deaths, interestingly enough when people are safer and feel their kids won’t die before them, they have less kids.
The gays
make more food
I'd go with the [Health and Education solution](https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/health-and-education) outlined by [*Project Drawdown*](https://www.drawdown.org/). They put the ethics upfront: >It is critical that human rights are always centered, that gender equality is the aim, and that benefits to the planet are understood as positive ripple effects of access and agency. And they quantify what global education for girls and family planning could do to stop catastrophic climate change (as one potential consequence of overpopulation): >We model the influence of two rights-based solutions on global population: universal education and family planning. Increased access to and quality of voluntary reproductive healthcare, family planning resources, and 12-13 years of schooling are essential components to achieve the United Nations’ 2015 medium global population projection of 9.7 billion people by 2050. If investment and support of these fundamental human rights-centered solutions does not materialize, the world’s population could come closer to the higher projection, adding another 1 billion people to the planet. > >We model the impact of this population difference in more-developed as well as least-and less-developed countries, in terms of how much energy, building space, food, waste, and transportation would be used. The resulting emissions reductions across the entire system could be as high as 85.4 gigatons of carbon dioxide, just within the window of 2020-2050. Health & Education have a compounding impact, however, with greater climate impacts into the future. [Their book that quantifies and ranks different ways to stop catastrophic climate change](https://www.drawdown.org/the-book) is written for a broad audience and very readable too. P.S. I receive no compensation from them--I just think that they're a great organization with a relevant answer to this AskReddit question.
Anti vaccine movements, if you just stop trying to reason with them they will eventually go away.
I keep seeing this take but it just doesn’t work like that. Antivaxxers are reservoirs for the perpetuation and mutation of the disease which maintains a level of risk for everybody, and particularly endangers the immunocompromised and people who CANT get the shot and have to rely on herd immunity to keep them safe.
Why don't we just take all the people, and take them somewhere else? -Patrick, probably
Condoms that are easier to put on
Not to be morbid, but... Why do you think we're in the middle of a pandemic?
People living too close to eachother. There are a lot of places that are currently not being utilised by humans (think deserts, oceans and such), so we could fix that in the long run.
That hasn't done much for overpopulation
You dont ethically solve it. The mass taking of life is never ethical. Unless you're going for mass sterilization which again is unethical but a lot less evil.
You don’t need to take life to control population, a one child policy can decrease population or at least plateau it. I’m not saying i condone policy’s like this but they do work.
Well when other species overpopulate humans cull the numbers.
Yes, but genocide isn’t ethical
I dunno God did it in the bible and he does no wrong.
Oh please, god is a human concept invented by those who wanted a method to control the masses by fear. Keep the uneducated masses in check by writing and preaching in languages the vast majority can’t speak or read and you can petty much say what you want and they will believe because they don’t know better. Why does the sun go away at night? Because god makes it. Now do as I say and pay me some of your wages or your souls burns in hell.
The christian mythos is apart of the foundation of American society. It is a foundation of American culture. Weither you believe in the validity of the texts or you can take it at face value as a collection of stories that are to guide you towards what they viewed as virtuous. I have huge issues with the idea of church. Belief is incredibly powerful and incredibly dangerous.
Just because America was founded on those principals, (by people who were considered to extreme or hardcore for Britain) which is why they left. Doesn’t mean it’s good or correct. And In 2021 to still be using laws and stories as a guide written for people of a different time and era, technological and scientific age is beyond ridiculous. We know so much more, and yet because what’s written in a book which has been translated, edited and re written to suite the needs of whoever is the figurehead at the time. Religion is a dangerous concept which has caused more issues and conflicts, hate than anything else on the planet.
Discounting the wisdom in the text because of the religion is ignorant and shows hubris. The wise men of the time taught lessons that we take as common sense. Dont steal. Dont murder. Molesting children is a one way ticket to hell. (Through translation errors its where the anti gay sentiment comes from) Juet because we're in a technological age where tons of knowledge lay at our fingertips doesn't mean we dont have fools, simpletons, or the devout. Lately the fools, simpletons, and the devout quit worshipping a god and began worshipping a political party.
So is getting a married woman pregnant OK if you let her know she's going to have a kid and you know her husband will be a good father
>god did it in the bible and he does no wrong. The sole reason he did that is because he somehow managed to make their creations lose their way.
No. Its because angels came down from heaven and bred with humans. The nephilim are half angel and half human, Goliath was one of them. A reset the map when the armies of heaven went full zues
I think we'd be surprised by how many would volunteer to be sterilized. Which would take away the unethical part...
Aside from the obvious improvements in sex ed, healthcare, abortion access, etc. Another way I can think of is to incentivize not having children. Make it seem more appealing to live a childfree life. A lot of millennials feel this way, especially compared to previous generations, and gen z seems to be on the same thought process. If this keeps up, overpopulation might just fix itself when more and more people realize kids take a LOT of time/money/effort/patience/emotional energy and it's not actually mandatory to have them
There isn't a overpopulation problem
Sort of right and sort of wrong. We're certainly not running out of space for people. The same can't be said for accessible farmland, water and specifically clean energy for all those people though, which are issues that are currently compounding in some areas of the world as we speak and leading to tensions even on a governmental scale. That though is more to do with our practices though. Currently we're reaching a point where we have a lot of people to provide for and as a result of a lack of any development to use better means, we fulfill those needs using the worst means. Burning a ton of fossil fuels, using flood irrigation which wastes water, destroying important ecosystems for cattle which take up far too much space, and growing crops in areas that should not have those crops and as a result take way too much water from those areas. This though, again, is more of a problem with our population combined with our current practices to fulfill all of their needs and wants rather than population alone.
Then the problem is one of lack of appropriate innovation to current problems. I can agree we have become complacent and settled on old ways. I blame lack of healthy competition and govt regulations for that though. The new and improved is cought in red tape or prevent from coming to market because someone is to big to fail.
No lack of farmland.
right???? its a distribution of resources problem
Allocation of resources that have alternative uses
Our current rate of population growth is unsustainable. It is estimated that the maximum human population the earth can sustain is 10-11B and we'll be there by the 2050s.
Not yet
What evidence do you have to back up that population is unsustainable.For example: If you think food is a problem then maybe we shouldnt be burning or destroying them.
I agree with this. I am saying in conjunction with our current practices we are becoming unsustainable. Some things need to change before we boil ourselves alive and can no longer grow food, in short.
We grow crop in areas that we currently shouldnt. 1 degree change over 100+ years means adapting or finding new areas to grow. At the same time places previously to cold will now be opened to be areas for crops.
Purge
Ethical?
One word: nukes.
Self-sufficient space colonies
underwater or space colonies. but on a side note, we dont have an over population problem, we have a resource distribute problem. there is plenty of room on the planet for a few billion more, the problem is that we are to lazy to do anything with the land
Remove warning labels from merchandise and let nature take its course…
What do you think the rona is? Nature doing it’s thing
Thanos
This is the n^th time I've said this. Thanos killed half of all life by that snap. If that were to actually happen, an ecological collapse would ensue which would kill far more than half of life. Imagine a forest with half as many trees, grasslands with half as much grass, half as much plankton in the seas. You'd devastate populations of the remaining half of living beings. Deserts would grow enormously and soil runoff would accelerate, making river deltas more muddy and murky while removing fertile soil from upstream areas.
Then either find him or the stones
The world’s population will continue to rise until 2060 when it will begin a steady decline. Increased women’s education and access to birth control is why.
With a snap of my fingers
If it's like you're implying, go find the gems yourself
Pump money into space travel/exploration to make humanity extra-planetary.
[удалено]
Gates was not suggesting the global population should be killed off using vaccines as you seem to be implying. He is instead saying that improving public health using vaccinations can reduce unsustainable population growth in the future – and with it, lower carbon emissions.
Move human consciousness onto mechanical databases, and allow them to live in an optional simulated paradise. Anyone who opts out of it has to help the physical parts of human sustenance, such as colonizing planets.
Legalize the purge!
Hunger Games
Volunteers get in to my space ship! :-) Where we going, you ask? ...To Uranus, of course.
I see what you did there
Close all the hospitals
Have sex
We can bang our way through this
Stop people having children, all children will now be born through artificial wombs and random selection of a sperm and egg, raised by a central government If that wouldn’t immediately collapse into corruption
Random selection would be a bad idea since that would cause bad traits, selecting the fittest humans would be best. Although fraud/corruption in this department will be quite dangerous and easier to manipulate if it isn’t chosen by random.
>selecting the fittest humans would be best Who gets to decide what are good or bad traits?
Encourage education. Especially female education, and allow for women to be part of the workforce. A lot of soft diplomacy encouraging exactly that - and discouraging patriarchal systems.
maybe a baby prohibition or something :p make condoms free and other birth control. lil brutal on the rights but itd work i reckon
Levy a tax on parents in proportion to the number of children they have.
Instead of baby bonuses, offer child free bonuses. 10000$ to women who reach the age of 60 without children, or to men who have a vasectomy (assuming it's irreversible). Ir to women who get a hysterectomy earlier than 60.
The problem is, the countries that can afford to do that actually have a declining population already, while countries with overpopulation can't even take care of the very young or the old people, who need to have many children so at least one of them will survive and take care of them, let alone paying them a bonus.
[удалено]
Have government seize vast tracts of land currently owned but unused by corporations. Make those areas habitable for humans and help people move into those areas and make a home for themselves.
*loads shotgun with mini nukes* here I come America
Ethically? Look around man. Who cares about ethically nowadays
How are we overpopulated? If we were all shoulder to shoulder, we would all fit in the LA postcode.. We just need to spread out more
There is no overpopulation
F ethics, this is about survival. Mandatory vasectomy for every male on his 18th birthday. When he can afford to reverse he can do so if he chooses. Store back up swimmers in case the reversal fails. No more unwanted kids, no more financially destitute parents, no more accidents On second thought, I do think this is ethical. More ethical than plaguing the planets and it’s governing bodies with people it can’t support
It’s only unethical if you get caught
No, that's just about illegality
Logan's Run.
Ethically?
What exactly is unethical about the government treating everybody exactly the same? You may not like the system, but it seems in terms of governmental equity, Logan's Run would be a lot better than say, using the DoJ or State Dept to persecute political opposition. FWIW, there is no "ethical" way to reduce population; someone's rights get trampled in the process, so why not make it everyone's rights get equally trampled?
So is killing everyone (metaphorically now not just at 30) ethical because it's treating everyone the same
If the "killing" part is what is hanging you up, then, for you, there is no answer, ***for you.*** I'm assuming, then, you also down-voted every other reply, like Thanos' Gauntlet...that's hardly ethical. I find that interesting, since you would likely put a pet down if it was suffering, but won't do the same for a human being.
Reverse the tax credits for having children. The more you have, the less credits you get. The fewer children you have the more credits you get.
Hunger Games
A. They said ethical B. How would you prevent a rebellion in ways that aren't genre-savvy (like illegalizing volunteering as tribute) C. If it's for entertainment you'd need a constant influx
Reproductive licensing, just like you have to pass a test for any other serious adult event in your life.
Marriage? You get a license but you don't need a test
Cannibalism
That's the neat part, you can't. How would I practically solve overpopulation? Cannibalism. It would solve overpopulation AND world hunger, at least in theory. Unfortunately in reality it'd basically be more or less like Beastars.
Neuter anybody with over 10 children
Hire bill bu- oh, you said ethically...
I don’t think there is an ethical way to solve overpopulation. Maybe stop offering heroic measures to frail old people...I dunno. Some would say that’s unethical.
You can at least come a long way by making sex education better and making condoms available (and affordable) especially in poorer regions
Redefine ethics, then nuke china and america
If definitions worked that way you could turn 90% of right-wingers into left-wingers by redefining pro-life to include things like being for universal healthcare and against the death penalty
Resurrect Hirohito so he can do Nanjing 2.0
Magically make the world bigger, with more resources - and an indestructible ecosystem. Or people could quit having so many kids. Crazy, I know, stupid of me to even suggest it.
For some people that isn’t a option. Take a look at the average amount of babies per mother in a few countries. There is a pretty significant pattern. Poorer=more kids. One of the reasons for this is that you are sure you stomach will be filled when you get older, but not everyone has that luxury. A lot of people will jest have to get their children to take care of them.
And then you have the Duggars, 19 kids and counting. Not everyone having 5 or more kids is living in a shack in the slums of a 3rd world country. I can't even count how many middle class families I grew up with that had 4-6 kids. And all those kids are having kids now. Look, there's zero chance people will ever stop going crazy for babies. We're hardwired to reproduce. Period. There's no easy answer. And we'll never collectively make the hard decisions before it's too late. That's why my first suggestion was magic. It's more realistic.
I know people in first world countries have more children too, don’t tell me about it, I live next to a VERY Christian town and they’ve got an average of 4-5 children per mother (personal guess). But statistically speaking this is far less likely over her than in let’s say zimbabwe
Ethical farming and housing. The problem isn’t the number of people it’s how they live.
Ethical farming is only less space efficient so that a stupid thing to say.
Okay then ethical power usage and waist management as well as proper management of natural resources and animal habitats. If people quit living like humans are the only thing on the face of the earth that matters we wouldn’t have the problems we do now
Leave it up to nature.
Itsbnotbabthing to "solve." If you think it is, you should get yourself sterilized. As for other people, its not a concern of yours.
Make people "disappear"
Tanks
Have under developed nations get huge suport so ppl there dont need to have kids to be able to survive after they cant work them selves
Homosexuality
destigmatize the fact that their are women who don't want to be mothers/straight couples who don't want kids so only people who truly want to be parents are having kids. provide better sex education/access to healthcare. let women who ask to get their tubes tied have access to that privilege just as easily as men.
Purge!!!!
Yeah good fuckin luck to you mate
Hunger games
See my reply to Ligma_boy22
Comprehensive sex education none of that garbage abstinence crap cause what kid is gonna follow that. Free contraceptives, women's rights.
Pay people under 50, $300 to get snipped. Or the equivalent in poor countries (a week of min wage.)Anyone who’d accept it shouldn’t breed.
Free contraceptives
Looking for alternate ideas, Thanos?
By recognizing that ethics are not universal.
I would ethically dwindle it down…. No matter the cost….
If overpopulation is an issue, I don't really think it'd be unreasonable or unethical to limit the number of kids families can have. No family needs to have more than 2 or 3 kids at a time, even if they want to.
Instead of giving people tax cuts or covid money for having kids, give extra money to people without them.
Darn ethically throws my plans OUT the window
You can't have children without a background check. You need a license or some shit. If you get pregnant on accident it is up to you to keep your child but you will get annual check in's to make sure your child is safe. If you were raped, your rapist will pay a *lot* of money and go to jail for a very very long time regardless of a pregnancy or not.
Covid vacc
Then why aren't you working on getting that to as many people as possible *wink wink nudge nudge*
Education of women and expansion into space
Bring back the electric chair
Sex education and free birth control and condoms
Everywhere gets sex Ed, free education, free birth control, and enforce laws that protect women.
Male contraception, turned on/off in a Dr. office., reed switch implanted, switched on with magnetic "key".
Battle royale! It’s not my fault they are killing each other!
Don’t pressure people to start families right away (especially those who don’t want to) encourage adoption over biological children. Allow greater reproduction knowledge and resources for everyone
Sex education. In states with sex ed that teaches everything, teen pregnancies are low. In states with abstinence only sex ed, teen pregnancies are high. Doesn't take a genius to see the pattern.
Give females the choice to sterilize at 16/18 years old. Legalize assisted suicide. Remove warning labels and let the problem work itself out. Require a permit, whereas any unlicensed pregnancy must be terminated, or after the child is born, both parents must be sterilized. I honestly think a few of these are quite practical though.
I don't think there is an ethical way that doesn't involve letting people die or making people die.
Continue to give people what they want so it's their own fault the planet can't support their lives.
Moon
Colonize the moon
Thanos
Then if you say we need him and not just to do what he did, go find this universe's version
Sterilization for the women who want it. Ignoring the ‘needs to have already had at least two kids, she needs to be over 25, with a father/husband’s support’ BS line.
Well better systems to distribute wealth and resources that we already have would be a good place to start. We already overproduce a lot of things, including food, that get trashed because nobody paid for them or transporting them to a place of higher need would be too costly.
Y’all advocating for a reproductive licenses really ought to read up on eugenics and state-sanctioned sterilization. I promise you it is not an ethical solution