this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2026
380 points (85.6% liked)

memes

22570 readers
2827 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 11 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

I'm not arguing for population growth but we definitely have more than enough resources for everyone now. Scarcity isn't the problem, it's that we allow people to hoard those resources and we waste a ton of them.

[–] mrmisses@lemmy.world 10 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

When we can prove it by providing everyone the same (good) standard of life, across the entire world, then I'll believe it.

Stuff like everyone has housing, clean safe water, safe to eat food, able to escape from extreme climate swings, healthcare, vacation, parental leave, and I'm sure lots more that I'm not thinking of.

Once everyone has that, then we can look at what we can expand on

[–] boatswain@infosec.pub 2 points 12 hours ago

We will never have that as long as we live in a capitalist society

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

"We have enough resources" is such a shitty god damned argument. At least you didn't go "hurr durr everyone on the planet can fit in Manhattan if they just squeeze tightly".

But god damned ask yourself what kind of world you want to live in, not min maxxing the number of people alive for some absolutely incomprehensible reason.

"WE CAN SQUEEZE ONE MORE IN THERE, BOYS! SHE CAN TAKE IT!"

For WHAT?! WHY?!

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

You people, I swear. I said specifically that I'm not arguing for increased population and yet your whole response is structured like that's exactly what I said we should do. Do you even read what you respond to or do you just scan until you find the right key word to launch into a rant?

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 15 hours ago

Did I miss something? You said it is a "shitty" argument, but you never state what is wrong with it.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Well if we could make everyone have a good quality of life and not destroy the environment and at the same time have more people to enjoy life and to help drive innovation and art, it would generally be for the better.

[–] fireweed@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think you comprehend exactly how large a number 7 billion actually is. There's plenty of innovation and art potential already.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 0 points 12 hours ago

Currently a good portion of those people are barely surviving and don't have bandwidth for art or effective innovation. But that's not really the point. If people are happy and have a good quality of life, and there's no negatives, then more is better because it's more happiness.