← Back to context

Comment by kelnos

14 hours ago

In a way I think we've been seeing the horse analogy play out for a while, with declining birth rates in developed countries. When people are pessimistic about the future, they have fewer children. Perhaps it's not as dramatic as the decline in horses, but I think there's a bit of a parallel there.

> When people are pessimistic about the future, they have fewer children.

I can think of many reasons why people have fewer children for reasons other than pessimism about the future.

One can also argue that, besides lack of contraception, pessimism about survival of your offspring drove some amount of creating descendants.

> When people are pessimistic about the future, they have fewer children.

But also, statistically, the richer you are, the fewer children you have. Why do you think those who are seemingly in the best position to be optimistic about the future are those most pessimistic about it? It is quite counterintuitive on the surface. Is it because the rich feel they have nowhere else to go, whereas those who are poor can still envision becoming rich themselves someday, giving them hope about a brighter future?

Regardless of the exact mechanics, the human state is self-correcting. Being rich is unsustainable without a lot of people around you. When births decline too much, those who are rich will become poor, and thus will start producing more children again. Humans will not echo horses based on this.