<i>It is also evident that while scientists argued over and defended the precise atmospheric physics and chemistry details of climate models, their early scare scenarios were always overstated because of one simple foundational metric where their assumptions were wrong: future population.</i>
I'm going to say this wasn't accidental. There have always been deeply political purposes behind catastrophizing things that can only be fixed by "compulsion if voluntary methods fail". And that would certainly include predictable changes to our economic systems that would make the Frankfurt crowd smile broadly.
This was a great article. I'm going to go ahead and put a target on my back and be completely political incorrect in the interest of free speech and honesty. I likely fall into the cornucopian camp but want to address a few items on the agenda. This is all anecdotal from travel, reading, my own learned experience and talking to a lot of people over the course of my life. I agree that economists tend toward linear growth models based on population but I feel strongly that people can deliver new economic models/incentive structures and help deliver prosperity. The cultural aspect bothers me quite a bit. No one, no one is willing to talk about gender imbalances and the underlying cultural issues that cause them. Excess men/missing women occur in larger numbers where women are repressed. Odd isn't it? Immigration seems to coming out of those countries at larger proportions as well. If the capitalist system is so flawed and the 'west' is so doomed why is that? Have you been to a large city in India or Africa and really taken a look at the daunting cultural/infrastructure/generational issues there? It can be overwhelming and change is slow perhaps too slow for younger generations. I think some degrowth will happen and that's not a bad thing. Women who have children later have better lifelong outcomes. As do their children. There is a lot of data on this subject. The uniqueness of the west economic 'miracle' could arguably be tied directly to women entering the work force en masse after world word 2 and suffrage etc... It's all an intricately connected web. Just my two cents.
I also identify as a “Cornucopian” and agree that the best method of controlling population size lies in increasing wealth for the developing world. Convincing our plutocrat overseers of this is the difficulty.
Thanks for an accurate summation of our current situation. Call me a Cornucopian if you like as I’ve held Julian Simon as a hero for years.
I question all future predictions, both the experts and even yours. As per JS, the world is dynamic, not static and humanity is the most resilient species the world has ever produced. Amazingly diverse solutions will be adopted IF we rely on local solutions rather than the scourge of our time, centralized bureaucratic control.
For centuries human flourishing was impeded by ignorance on nature and mythological controls. Today largely, nature has yielded her secrets but our mythological controls have taken a massive turn for the worse. The climate change fiasco is one of the serious intellectual flaws, it is not the worst. Believing the government can and will solve our problems, particularly our economic ones will become visible as the greatest self inflicted error of all time.
With respect of needing a young population to care for an aging, non productive group I claim we erroneously ignore that most humans are productive over their lifetime with many being spectacularly so. The greatest dilemma we all face is a government that strips our past earnings, our savings, of valu through monetary devastation.
Thanks for the mention of Norman Borlaug. Some call him the man who saved a billion lives. It’s truly amazing that almost nobody knows that name. If we properly educated our young people, there would be a national holiday in his commemoration.
<i>It is also evident that while scientists argued over and defended the precise atmospheric physics and chemistry details of climate models, their early scare scenarios were always overstated because of one simple foundational metric where their assumptions were wrong: future population.</i>
I'm going to say this wasn't accidental. There have always been deeply political purposes behind catastrophizing things that can only be fixed by "compulsion if voluntary methods fail". And that would certainly include predictable changes to our economic systems that would make the Frankfurt crowd smile broadly.
- Krumhorn
- Krumhorn
This was a great article. I'm going to go ahead and put a target on my back and be completely political incorrect in the interest of free speech and honesty. I likely fall into the cornucopian camp but want to address a few items on the agenda. This is all anecdotal from travel, reading, my own learned experience and talking to a lot of people over the course of my life. I agree that economists tend toward linear growth models based on population but I feel strongly that people can deliver new economic models/incentive structures and help deliver prosperity. The cultural aspect bothers me quite a bit. No one, no one is willing to talk about gender imbalances and the underlying cultural issues that cause them. Excess men/missing women occur in larger numbers where women are repressed. Odd isn't it? Immigration seems to coming out of those countries at larger proportions as well. If the capitalist system is so flawed and the 'west' is so doomed why is that? Have you been to a large city in India or Africa and really taken a look at the daunting cultural/infrastructure/generational issues there? It can be overwhelming and change is slow perhaps too slow for younger generations. I think some degrowth will happen and that's not a bad thing. Women who have children later have better lifelong outcomes. As do their children. There is a lot of data on this subject. The uniqueness of the west economic 'miracle' could arguably be tied directly to women entering the work force en masse after world word 2 and suffrage etc... It's all an intricately connected web. Just my two cents.
I also identify as a “Cornucopian” and agree that the best method of controlling population size lies in increasing wealth for the developing world. Convincing our plutocrat overseers of this is the difficulty.
Indeed! Great essay. Along those lines - population control of the peoples https://frederickrsmith.substack.com/p/population-control-of-the-peoples-964
Thanks for an accurate summation of our current situation. Call me a Cornucopian if you like as I’ve held Julian Simon as a hero for years.
I question all future predictions, both the experts and even yours. As per JS, the world is dynamic, not static and humanity is the most resilient species the world has ever produced. Amazingly diverse solutions will be adopted IF we rely on local solutions rather than the scourge of our time, centralized bureaucratic control.
For centuries human flourishing was impeded by ignorance on nature and mythological controls. Today largely, nature has yielded her secrets but our mythological controls have taken a massive turn for the worse. The climate change fiasco is one of the serious intellectual flaws, it is not the worst. Believing the government can and will solve our problems, particularly our economic ones will become visible as the greatest self inflicted error of all time.
With respect of needing a young population to care for an aging, non productive group I claim we erroneously ignore that most humans are productive over their lifetime with many being spectacularly so. The greatest dilemma we all face is a government that strips our past earnings, our savings, of valu through monetary devastation.
Thanks for the mention of Norman Borlaug. Some call him the man who saved a billion lives. It’s truly amazing that almost nobody knows that name. If we properly educated our young people, there would be a national holiday in his commemoration.