FTFY. That's just household use, Clyde. We haven't even started with the water usage that makes the rich rich - ie, the private ownership of industry and commerce (which, of course, externalizes the destruction of water resources).

That’s hardly out of the realm of possibility considering the population already has gone up 8x since 1950

That kind of population growth is a thing of the past. The only way to successfully reverse that would be by design - such as the measures taken by certain aspects of the US political establishment to enforce patriarchal norms through institutionalized violence (ie, the criminalization of women's healthcare).

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Water used for industry is still going to be used regardless of who controls that industry. Poor people can be just as greedy as rich ones, they just don't have a means to act on it.

Population growth has slowed but it has not stopped. Even at 1 or 2 % per year it will be only a few generations before it becomes an issue. 1% of 6,000,000 people is a lot more than 1% of 600,000.

[–] masquenox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Water used for industry is still going to be used regardless of who controls that industry.

Absolutely not. Pretending that capitalism doesn't work the way capitalism works is a certain dead-end for your argument.

they just don’t have a means to act on it.

That is one piss-poor justification for the status quo.

Population growth has slowed but it has not stopped.

The people at the top aren't worried about population growth these days, Clyde - they are worried about population reversal. You wanna know why?

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Absolutely not. Pretending that capitalism doesn’t work the way capitalism works is a certain dead-end for your argument.

Wtf does that even mean?. The point is there will still be a demand for goods whether it's produced by a farm/factory owned by one individual or a collective of workers. They'll still be consuming the water.

That is one piss-poor justification for the status quo.

I'm not justifying anything. All I'm trying to do is explain to you that resources are finite and too many people will burn through them. If you don't think poor people can be greedy and wasteful then I encourage you to get out more.

The people at the top aren’t worried about population growth these days, Clyde - they are worried about population reversal. You wanna know why?

The only reason I ever hear for that is from racists because it's the white people that slowed down the most. Population projections for the world do not show a decline. Unless of course you take the lack of resources into account...

[–] masquenox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Wtf does that even mean?

Pretending that production for profit and production for need is the same thing is fallacious - end of story.

All I’m trying to do is explain to you that resources are finite and too many people will burn through them.

You still haven't managed to justify the right-wing trope of "overpopulation" - pretending that the vast majority's consumption is (somehow) the problem isn't proving it, merely regurgitating it.

the white people that slowed down the most.

Sooo... you have figured out that in a capitalist society access to women's healthcare is merely another commodity - and, thanks to colonialist pillaging and repression, white people do tend to have more access to that commmodity?

You don't say.

Population projections for the world do not show a decline.

No... it shows a trend towards stabilization - which, just by itself, demoslishes the entire concept of "overpopulation."

Unless of course you take the lack of resources into account…

What lack of resources. Resources being hoarded by a capitalist elite was as true in 1950 as it was in 2023 - so how does that affect the trope you are trying to justify?