All Of It Makes Sense!

AI, Drones, Robots; these are starting to take over our lives. While they haven't replace every single corner of the world, we see in developed countries like US, UK, and China that they replaced workers to an extent. McDonalds (or is it KFC) have robotic arms, together with AI (or maybe don't even need AI) to automatically fry the french fries (since it's just specific steps and timing), and perhaps chicken? Then, there are drones delivery of packages and whatsoever replacing human deliverer, then where drones aren't in work, auto-cars replace them (one isn't sure if that's real, but one saw videos on YouTube that there are auto-delivery cars in China to deliver food and many deliverer waiting to grab one but being snatched by the auto-delivery car instead, hence losing their job).

All these changes means in the future, unless you change your job, there would be less job and less job. People mentioned about introducing new (unthought-of-yet) job for those who don't have today. People said about what other stuffs people could do. Worse, people pay you for scrolling social media or updating information about yourself, as in the Web3 arena. But Mother Nature had another idea.

The problem with not enough job, not enough food, not enough of anything, is because we have too many people. The ultimate solution, then, is not to create new job, to create more food, but to reduce the number of people. The first thing that may come into your mind is for more war like Russian-Ukraine or Israel-Hamas that kind, and you think it's cruel. Or maybe, you think, create a concentration camp to reduce the amount of inhabitants that kind of stuff. But they are all wrong. Just statistically, war kill far far less people than hunger each year. We only care about these cancer, these war, these tsunamis, that hurricanes, because they're news worthy, not because they kill more people. Perhaps, all of these add together didn't even register a portion of how much hunger had killed in the "Third World". And by a portion, one really mean "a portion". How small it is, plot it on a pie chart and see for yourself.

OK, let's get back to the main point. To reduce the number of people, we don't have to be cruel to kill the current living; we just need to reduce birth. Those that're never born we won't inflict any pain (for they haven't yet exist) nor any torture. And luckily, Mother Nature had already reacted with that. Just see how many people refuse to have a child today and you'd know that Nature had fight back. Many countries said, PLEASE, GIVE BIRTH TO MORE, AND WE'LL REAR YOU with subsidies, like Japan or what other countries that had decreasing birth rates currently or even to low levels (but that one didn't hear about). These aren't a problem to Mother Nature. To Her, on the whole, she just wanted to lower the amount of inhabitants as it rises to a level that our Mother Earth can no longer sustain without destroying itself in the long run. Yeah, well, energy does get into a cycle, but that cycle is far longer than we'd expected. Just like climate change will eventually turn to Ice Age, but by that time, perhaps we're long extinct due to the heat we created ourselves, or maybe we'd migrated to another planet already, we don't know.

So, it doesn't make sense anymore of countries trying to increase birth rate. Yes, for the sake of the country having not enough people, the government might want to increase birth rate. But looking at the global level, it no longer makes sense to try to sustain so many births when resources, jobs, and etc. aren't enough. We should look into decreasing our birth rate until a sustainable level, a level that doesn't strain our world so much. So, keep up with the good work, stop having babies for the moment until we need them again.

P.S. the "not enough food" part: one don't know if you notice, but one noticed the chicken and pork meat bought today are smaller, hypothesizing that they don't have enough time to rear them big before slaughtering. All the more sense if that means we don't have enough food, or we don't have to do something as premature slaughtering. Ignoring the idea that slaughtering of animals is cruel as it inflicts torture here.