MKorostoff
commented
2 years ago If the question is, "can we control global population by deliberately employing hunger and disease to kill off excess population" the factual answer is no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility. It is well documented that improved living conditions reduce birth rates. Here's a great video on this subject.
If the question is "should we?" the answer is still no, we should not use genocide for population control. Would you still feel that the death of millions of children was desirable "for the good of all the world" if your own children were among them? Of course not, it's only when contemplating the death of other people's children that anyone shows up to declare the virtues of death-by-poverty. Inevitably, those most concerned with resource consumption in the developing world are already consuming 50x more than the people they propose to kill.
I love your graph. It's so useful and I would love for the suggested programs/policies to become reality. However, I wonder if you've ever been asked and also that maybe you can address the following question somewhere on the graph:
What about the issue of finite resources? What if we did all of what the graph proposed we could do? Would the lives saved over the course of the programs' life cycles, cause the world's resources to be depleted at an exponentially faster rate?
If so, wouldn't that result then dictate that for the good of all the world, and the survival of the human race, we shouldn't allow the redistribution of wealth to happen?
Thank you for seriously considering this!