"Malthus taught that population increase tends to outrun increase of food supply, that this represented an economic danger, and that “checks” on this population increase alone can prevent it from destroying a
nation, such as epidemics and wars, unhealthy living conditions and poverty. Malthusianism expressly
regards care for the poor, the aged, and orphans, as a mistake"

What is your opinion on this? Is it better to just let some people die to secure a better future?

Edited 1/19/2017 15:17:45

My food partially comes from Kenya

@PE, That is called clinical psychopathy, which is a trait inherent in Reptillians.

Edited 1/19/2017 18:38:23

Like the abortion we should've had on you Tabby?

^+1

^^No. Abortion is an extreme form of family power. Felinism is against family power.

Edited 1/20/2017 00:15:12

Universal literacy is the answer to the Malthusian dilemma. It is generally the case that as a nation becomes more literate and as the physical conditions under which people live improve family sizes become smaller. It is of particular interest that female literacy has a greater effect than male literacy. For evidence of this consult the CIA fact book, or some other source of accurate actuarial data.

A good source of actuarial data is the Gapminder website.

www.gapminder.org/answers/will-saving-poor-children-lead-to-overpopulation/

Tabby, I would like to make a comment regarding your thought experiment, where humanity becomes perfectly sterile while at the same time living for thousands of years.

Let's leave aside the matter of the scenario being absurd.

Hope is one of those intangible things that make this a world that we live in tolerable. Hope is a multifaceted thing, but the hope we derive from each new generation, from a child, is a thing which is indispensable.

An evidence of a grotesque kind is to be found in the rates of morbidity and mortality in world war two era German concentration camps. In those camps where infants and children deemed unsuitable for labor were publicly murdered the parents of those children had a mortality rate 80 percent higher than those adults not subjected to the horror of watching their children be murdered. To be sure your thought experiment is different from the very real phenomena I am making reference to, nonetheless I believe it is relevant.

Nihilism isn't as fun as some people think it is.

Best wishes...

There's a reason food productivity is tied to population booms. When food becomes far more available, the population booms as the supply of the food influences the price of food to decrease. The population booms as families can spend less money on more food. This also in turn would allow the families to spend more on other things, including education, clothing, housing, etc, which would increase the living standards of said people, and eventually help decrease the birthrate.

(Just my thoughts, for the most part)

PE, all of us will become orphans.