That’s a pretty shit argument. Humans are not ecologically viable for life to continue on planet earth at our current population, even if we remove all cars.
Yea no what? We are already setting population targets via immigration right now, the question is about what the target should be (and why) not whether or not to do it.
To do what? Limit immigration so that poor ppl from countries we immiserated, exploited, and put in danger of climate collapse from our overconsumption can die? Sounds like nazi shit to me
Wat? Should we just let anyone who wants to live in Canada do so? That sounds a lot like suicide to me.
Setting a fixed population target for optimized citizen benefit of available resources and then bringing in immigrants to make up for the birth shortfall seems like a fairly sensible option. It’s not like our immigration would be “low” even if we did that, though it wouldn’t be as high as it currently is it would still be hundreds of thousands of people per year.
Ppl from the global south have to immigrate bc of the plundering, immiseration, political violence, and climate catastrophe caused by colonial imperialist global north countries like Canada. You’re advancing a fascist position, to force your country’s victims to die so you can continue to live in undeserved privileged luxury
Yes it is. We hunted multiple animals to extinction and poisoned vast stretches of land long before the industrial revolution, we didn’t need cars to be assholes to nature.
True, but we could sustain a lot more people and also not bring animals to extinction and destroy the environment with the right policies. Blaming overpopulation is just facist propaganda.
The number of people shouting the word fascist around here is hilarious. It’s not fascist to limit immigration, it’s a policy employed by literally every country in the world.
trains
Trains are not financially viable for rural areas.
Cars are not ecologically viable for life to continue on planet earth
That’s a pretty shit argument. Humans are not ecologically viable for life to continue on planet earth at our current population, even if we remove all cars.
Yeah no, that’s Malthusian shit you’re arguing. It’s not equivalent to degrowth
Yea no what? We are already setting population targets via immigration right now, the question is about what the target should be (and why) not whether or not to do it.
To do what? Limit immigration so that poor ppl from countries we immiserated, exploited, and put in danger of climate collapse from our overconsumption can die? Sounds like nazi shit to me
Wat? Should we just let anyone who wants to live in Canada do so? That sounds a lot like suicide to me.
Setting a fixed population target for optimized citizen benefit of available resources and then bringing in immigrants to make up for the birth shortfall seems like a fairly sensible option. It’s not like our immigration would be “low” even if we did that, though it wouldn’t be as high as it currently is it would still be hundreds of thousands of people per year.
Ppl from the global south have to immigrate bc of the plundering, immiseration, political violence, and climate catastrophe caused by colonial imperialist global north countries like Canada. You’re advancing a fascist position, to force your country’s victims to die so you can continue to live in undeserved privileged luxury
https://readsettlers.org/
That is just not true.
Yes it is. We hunted multiple animals to extinction and poisoned vast stretches of land long before the industrial revolution, we didn’t need cars to be assholes to nature.
True, but we could sustain a lot more people and also not bring animals to extinction and destroy the environment with the right policies. Blaming overpopulation is just facist propaganda.
The number of people shouting the word fascist around here is hilarious. It’s not fascist to limit immigration, it’s a policy employed by literally every country in the world.
Limiting migration is one thing (conservative), but blaming anything on overpopulation is another (facist)