@s2208 @LostShakerOfSalt @BattleDwarfGimli @pyrate @tyler @BowsacNoodle @Floydian_Psychology @HyperboreanWave @vic Yes and no.

Broadly, I would agree that most countries could afford that.

Sadly, they pretty much all are built on ponzi scheme financial systems that require infinite expansion.

Most of this climate change bullshit is actually angling to have everyone end up paying carbon fees, constantly renting etc as a way of making sure those who currently hold wealth don't see that diminish when markets can no longer expand. So its a way of squeezing more out of each individual.

There is another problem with decreased population beyond a certain point. All capacities exist on a curve. If you are facing problems requiring a bunch of people from the top 1% of the IQ distribution to address -- the lower your population, absent eugenics, the smaller the absolute number of that 1% will be. The whole point of AI is to try to reduce the impact of that.

I would agree that lowering population would be beneficial IF it were coupled with eugenic policies. But since that's unlikely, it just means massive collapse of finances, government etc etc etc.