AI may be somehow providential. In about 150 years, the world’s population went from 800 million to 8 billion but the feat is unlikely to be repeated in the next 150 years.
That is, the world won’t be home to 80 billion people in 2170. All data show that birth rates are dropping and the global population will stabilize sometime between late this century and early next century at 10 to 14 billion people. After that, it might actually decline.
This is happening because there was not simply a change in health care and technology, cutting early deaths and extending life expectancy, but also an unprecedented historical change in the quality of life.
For all of human history, children have been a capital and a force. Families with many children had more manpower and thus more income, influence and social clout. In the past 50 years, for the first time, children have become a burden where more children meant more expenses.
Latest stories
China’s nuclear restraint rhetoric belied by rapidfire buildup
Critical industries, critical risks in ASEAN supply chains
A familiar quiet: Prabowo and the return of managed dissent
The quality change is that, on average, parents are caring for children as never before and that children no longer serve the needs of parents and the family – rather, it’s the other way around.
Children are not expected to become herders at the age of six or toil in a mine or on a boat. At that age, they need to go to school for 10-20 years. This was a rare privilege until mass education became the norm after the end of the 19th century.
The world came to believe that investing in mass education had much higher returns than sending most of its children to work at 5 or 6. Mass education also meant better health care for children; they can’t study if they are unwell.
With fewer children, parents’ affection and dedication are more concentrated: if you have a couple of kids, it’s different from having half a dozen or more. It has changed everything in the parent-child relationship. Children are an expensive and risky investment for families and society.
Therefore, a family or even a society can’t have too many children. There are still many children in places where there’s a strong religious drive or where they do not need investment.
For the rest of the people, children are a costly concentration of affection, which (because of their nature) cannot be wasted, and thus one cannot have too many of them. Even wars, a constant drain of blood and lives throughout human history, now need, in general, fewer people – with less carnage fewer children are sacrificed at the altar of death and glory.
Short of a nuclear apocalypse, wars now aim at destroying a country’s infrastructure and crippling its economy, with warfare flying on the blades of AI-driven drones or cyberattacks.
Sign up for one of our free newsletters
- The Daily Report Start your day right with Asia Times' top stories
- AT Weekly Report A weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories
It’s fortunate, because the planet would not sustain 80 billion people, and, despite what techno-entrepreneur Elon Musk may believe, going to Mars doesn’t look like a real alternative to living on Earth.
Depopulation has its challenges, but there’s a solution. AI and robotics promise to increase productivity and assist people without a new population explosion. So now AI and machines are taking jobs away from people, and we feel it is bad.
Maybe in a few decades, though, we’ll feel lucky we have the machines because there won’t be people for those jobs. This perhaps should be the new dimension of our thinking.
This article first appeared on Appia Institute and is republished with permission. Read the original here.
Sign up here to comment on Asia Times stories
Sign in with Google Or Sign up Sign in to an existing account
Thank you for registering!
An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.
