Overpopulation

The throwaway and ultra convenience culture, and mass consumerism for the sake of it culture, needs to be destroyed yes. Current economic model can only lead to resource wars, famine etc. I don't believe we will come up with a better way of living but either way what we're currently doing is a one way ticket to some really bad stuff.

There is quite a bit that's factually incorrect in this post.

1. Whilst it's true that Germany has been below replacement since the late '70s, the issue was particularly acute in East Germany. Fertility fell off a cliff in the East after re-unification. The Eastern fertility rate was as low as 1.1 / 1.2 in the '90s. However, West Germany never declined to the same extent, typically hovering between 1.3-1.5. As I mentioned in a previous post, there are actually green shoots emerging in Germany. Their fertility rate is now above 1.6 and there is no reason to suggest that this upward trajectory will not continue.
2. Ireland does not have a negative birth rate, nor is our population growth solely attributable to immigration. I really wish people would stop making these wildly incorrect statements, without understanding even the basics of demographics. Whilst the Irish fertility rate has dropped since the '70s, we have recorded very substantial natural increase (births - deaths) every single year since records began. Indeed, our fertility rate was at or just below replacement level (1.9 - 2.1) every year from 2000 - 2016. Case in point, in 2009, when Ireland recorded a fertility rate of 2.1, there were 47,000 more births than deaths in this country. Due to the pandemic our fertility rate declined to 1.65 in 2020. However, TOTAL 2020 population growth in Ireland was 34,000. Fully 23,000 or 68% of the 2020 increase attributes to natural growth, with the remaining 32% accounted for by immigration. 45% of the inward migration in 2020 was Irish nationals returning home from abroad. There is no reason that Ireland cannot return to a near replacement fertility rate. We are also fortunate that the relatively high birth rates from 2000 - 2015 will generate an echo effect in 10-25 years as that generation begins family formation. This should replenish our population well into the 21st century.
3. Japan is experiencing what looks like an intractable demographic crisis. They are currently losing >0.5 million people per year. This is also compounded by the fact that the country is 'super-aged' i.e. almost 30% of the population is at least 65 years old. The scenario in Russia is less pessimistic. Their population pyramid is not as aged as that of Japan. Putin is also acutely aware of the demographic issues facing the country and has committed to throwing resources at it. Given the autocratic nature of Russia under Putin's leadership, it would not be a surprise to see a future improvement in Russian demographics.

He's not wrong. There is a whole host of family-friendly initiatives available in Germany. There is decent provision of affordable Kindergarten places across the entire country, something that's a pipe dream in Ireland right now.

The real reason for low German birth rates is the archaic attitude towards combining motherhood and a career. Until recently, mothers who worked were perceived as 'Rabenmutter'. It's translates literally as a raven mother or somebody who is uncaring. What this meant in practice was that educated German women felt that they had to choose either a career or motherhood. Thankfully, this attitude has changed in recent times, which is likely driving the uptick in the fertility rate there.

Great post. The other thing is without constant immigration of people to take low paid jobs, this constant economic expansion at all costs, championed by the likes of the poster you're responding to, cannot carry on. Look around you in Ireland, every Spar, garage, cleaners, every meat factory, are all staffed by foreigners. If we stopped immigration we're still not going to fill those jobs even if the wages raised dramatically.

Do we just accept this line that state pensions are unaffordable? Without question.

How are they going to afford pensions for the migrants then. How could they afford UBI or a four day week. Seems we must just accept our fate with insufficient scrutiny.

Hispanics tend to be conservative and thus tend to lean more republican than other minorities though.

They tend to be religious, they tend to value traditional family units.

They also support law and order because they don't like the drugs cartels infultrating destroying the society they have built for themselves in the US.

Many immigrants work in the oil and gas industries in places like Texas and would be resistant to crubs in that industry that Democrats would implement.

Plus they hate the new gender neutral word Latinx that the Democrats have made up for them.

It's makes no grammatical sense and is difficult to pronounce in Spanish, they prefer Latino or Latina

Too little, too late. Supposedly to avoid just the climate catastrophe (no mention of food, water, ...), humans need to produce less than 2 tons CO2 per annum.

In the EU, it's 6.7 tonnes (2019 data). In the US, it's something like 16. Worldwide average is 4, fortunately the populous world produces less CO2 (for now.)

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/want-to-fight-climate-change-have-fewer-children

and

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?view=map

Overpopulation is largely a myth. The earth can provide for all. If even the PRC has largely abandoned One Child, the overpopulation scaremongerers should take note. Population control efforts have without exception resulted in severely distorted demographics, usually a shortage of females. The crossings of the Med is more about people smuggling for profit. Various rad lefties with boats pose as saviours, so too do newly minted wokies like RNLI, who pick up the boats of people smugglers who follow a protocol of disabling their boats and getting ferried in comfort to their destination. These supposed rescuers make a pile of money. Anyhow, no overpopulation. There's no such thing.

There's no decoupling. More people = more carbon, on a global basis. And more people means less food, less good water, less arable land. Great that the EU's reduced it's carbon output, now, in the same time, what's happened worldwide? More people, more carbon. Hasn't part of the EU savings been due to offloading production of wood needed for biofuel to the US south (so, raising CO2 emissions there?) It doesn't matter where the CO2's emitted.

If by some miracle, the 2 tonnes per person goal can be reached, how long before it reverses the impact overpopulation and high CO2 emissions have had? It really is fatuous to think we can bicycle our way out of the current crisis, without a concerted effort to reduce population.