Wow. That was terrifying! And interesting. I loved hearing the clairty Corey has in his top things that could make a difference - reducing child mortality, family planning, getting rid of publicly listed companies and banning political donations. Some seem drastic, but not impossible. Would be great to see him on your show again.
I very much appreciated this focus on global human population overshoot. This issue has been seriously derailed at the UN and elsewhere by corporate powers totally indifferent to the human suffering and biodiversity damage at stake.
Many thanks for this episode. I was surprised that Corey predicts higher future fertility, and interested in your pushback. Can that really be right, given mass failure of food systems will increase mortality for prospective parents, and not just children?
I hear what you’ve said elsewhere, Nate, that population is not on top of your list of concerns because there is no time to (ethically) bring it down to where it needs to be in the time we have left. For me, ethically striving for population reduction is as much for its adaptation benefits as for mitigation: small families will simply have an easier time of surviving the unraveling. As far as policy, impacting population is much easier than a carbon tax, for example; fertility declines wherever women have access to contraception and some level of empowerment to resist pronatalist expectations, and the US could completely fund international family planning efforts for a fraction of what we spend on meat & dairy subsidies.
Thanks ever so much for this podcast. It was very informative. Tangentially I’d like to recommend Zoe Schlanger’s book, the Light Eaters, as well as her article in today’s article in the Atlantic about how many parts of our infrastructure is significantly overheating due to the current temperatures….and we really aren’t at peak “warming” yet.
Wow. That was terrifying! And interesting. I loved hearing the clairty Corey has in his top things that could make a difference - reducing child mortality, family planning, getting rid of publicly listed companies and banning political donations. Some seem drastic, but not impossible. Would be great to see him on your show again.
I very much appreciated this focus on global human population overshoot. This issue has been seriously derailed at the UN and elsewhere by corporate powers totally indifferent to the human suffering and biodiversity damage at stake.
Many thanks for this episode. I was surprised that Corey predicts higher future fertility, and interested in your pushback. Can that really be right, given mass failure of food systems will increase mortality for prospective parents, and not just children?
I hear what you’ve said elsewhere, Nate, that population is not on top of your list of concerns because there is no time to (ethically) bring it down to where it needs to be in the time we have left. For me, ethically striving for population reduction is as much for its adaptation benefits as for mitigation: small families will simply have an easier time of surviving the unraveling. As far as policy, impacting population is much easier than a carbon tax, for example; fertility declines wherever women have access to contraception and some level of empowerment to resist pronatalist expectations, and the US could completely fund international family planning efforts for a fraction of what we spend on meat & dairy subsidies.
Thanks ever so much for this podcast. It was very informative. Tangentially I’d like to recommend Zoe Schlanger’s book, the Light Eaters, as well as her article in today’s article in the Atlantic about how many parts of our infrastructure is significantly overheating due to the current temperatures….and we really aren’t at peak “warming” yet.
thanks Margaret -we're researching Zoe.
Great…you two seem to have many interests in common
Damn, talk about synchronicity! Dipping in.