Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tesla mission is to to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy. How is that related/ opposite?
For real?
sustainable energy required for one person is small. The amount of energy required for an apparently endlessly growing population is... endlessly growing and ... not sustainable. You can make efficiency improvements as Tesla wants to do, but at some point the size of a population makes life unsustainable, probably starting with energy requirements, but also food, extraction needs, pollution.
Any other view is futurist shangri-la fantasy.

As to Mars being for extinction events.... humanity needs to do a heck of a lot better on this orb to prove its value.
 
Total population dropping at the present time is not the point. The concern is population vs age distribution.
A decrease in birth rate can result in a massive shift in the ratio of people working vs retired. Depending when the rate was higher, there can be a looming issue that isn't reflected in total population.

In 2020 there were currently about
2.6 billion in the -19 bracket (1.13x older gen)
2.3 billion in the 20-39 bracket (1.3x older gen)
1.8 billion in the 40-59 bracket (2x older gen)
0.9 billion in the 60-79 bracket
0.15 billion in the 80+ bracket

Using rough ranges for simplicity.

Roughly 4.1 billion in the working range (20-59) vs 1 billion in the retired range, a ratio of 4:1.
Shift out 20 years and it's 4.9 billion working vs 2 billion retired 2.5:1 or a 60% increase
If annual births stay flat, in 40 years it would be 5 billion working to 2.8 billion retired, 1.8:1, a >2x shift from present conditions.
If poulation only stays flat (massive drop in births), in 40 years it could be 3.5 billion working to 2.8 billion retired, 1.25:1, over a 3x shift.

Numbers from Visualizing the World’s Population by Age Group
But considering the trend in automation of both the production of goods and the delivery of services, this mix is not that terrifying.
 
Depends where you think the pinch point is. Will healthcare be able to scale with an increasing older population and a lower ratio of workers to retirees?
Healthcare is somewhat of an outlier in regards to economics. One aspect is that the system is burdened by end of life costs. This figure should include more than just the last 12 months of life. As a person reaches the last half decade of life, hospital visits and medical procedures become more intensive and costly.

As medical technology continues to improve, this 5 year period will occur at a later age. The future may have far more retired people, but are also likely to be healthier for a longer period of time. They will continue to consume goods and services as long as their finances hold out.

Healthcare is one of the last bastions of person to person services. It is ripe for more automation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRP3
Total population dropping at the present time is not the point. The concern is population vs age distribution.
A decrease in birth rate can result in a massive shift in the ratio of people working vs retired. Depending when the rate was higher, there can be a looming issue that isn't reflected in total population.

In 2020 there were currently about
2.6 billion in the -19 bracket (1.13x older gen)
2.3 billion in the 20-39 bracket (1.3x older gen)
1.8 billion in the 40-59 bracket (2x older gen)
0.9 billion in the 60-79 bracket
0.15 billion in the 80+ bracket

Using rough ranges for simplicity.

Roughly 4.1 billion in the working range (20-59) vs 1 billion in the retired range, a ratio of 4:1.
Shift out 20 years and it's 4.9 billion working vs 2 billion retired 2.5:1 or a 60% increase
If annual births stay flat, in 40 years it would be 5 billion working to 2.8 billion retired, 1.8:1, a >2x shift from present conditions.
If poulation only stays flat (massive drop in births), in 40 years it could be 3.5 billion working to 2.8 billion retired, 1.25:1, over a 3x shift.

Numbers from Visualizing the World’s Population by Age Group

Using this as an argument to continue growing the population is like arguing you need a new car because the paint got scratched. The ratio of retirees to working population is an economic problem. It's real, but quite survivable. Running out of resources is not survivable.

Japan hit the threshold where there were too many retirees in the early 90s. They suffered about 25 years of economic doldrums because of it, but nothing terrible happened. They are coming out of it now as the population is stabilizing to a more economically stable balance.

Many developed countries can prevent the doldrums completely if they allow immigration from less well off countries. Despite the political issues with that, many European and North American countries have done that and the demographic curve for the United States is fairly healthy with only a narrowing in the last few years (looks like it started in 2017).
Demographics of the United States - Wikipedia

The UK is pretty healthy
Demography of the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

Germany is facing a bit of an economic hiccup soon
Demographics of Germany - Wikipedia

Russia is worse than Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#/media/File:Russian_population_(demographic)_pyramid_(structure)_on_January,_1st,_2022.png

China is facing a problem possibly worse than Russia
Demographics of China - Wikipedia

If a country pushes through the economic problem created by a demographic bulge retiring, it comes out the other side and does fine. It's a temporary problem that only lasts for a generation or less. And there are many ways to mitigate it.

Looks like Musk is dropping Twitter…. Smart move

Tesla stock rebounded big after the announcement. It was a stupid move on his part and while it looks like there will be some court hoo haw about it, I hope it really is over.
 
Using this as an argument to continue growing the population is like arguing you need a new car because the paint got scratched. The ratio of retirees to working population is an economic problem. It's real, but quite survivable. Running out of resources is not survivable.
Yes, (at the limit) infinite population with finite resources is unsustainable.
My post was an attempt to differentiate population growth (which was claimed to be Elon's concern) from population age ratios (which I think is Elon's concern).
I disagree that it's "easy" to understand his obsession with population since it's not based in reality. World population is not collapsing, it's not even dropping, and if it did it's not automatically bad and would likely benefit our environment and thus humanity as a whole.

The US data you posted sure looks like a 2 million+ wave is moving on in age whereas is used to be a taper, meanwhile birth rate is decreasing (constant but aging population).
And yes, if the country adjusts to support the new ratio, things will work out (assuming there is enough resource generation to support that ratio).
 
My post was an attempt to differentiate population growth (which was claimed to be Elon's concern) from population age ratios (which I think is Elon's concern).
Elon says there is no reason to read between the lines when he speaks, just reads the lines. He constantly talks about population collapse and how the earth could hold billions more people:
"Earth could sustain many times its current human population and the ecosystem would be fine. We definitely don’t have “too many people"" Also: "If there aren’t enough people for Earth, then there definitely won’t be enough for Mars."

That's not just concern about age demographics. It's also not remotely rational when considering the effects of the current population on the environment and no practical solutions in place to mitigate them in the near term. More people will accelerate the degradation of our environment, especially when simultaneously improving their living standards, something a person who claims to care about humanity should also care about. Since we know that improved living conditions lead to lower birth rates one must wonder how that fits into his vision. His "analysis" doesn't seem to have gone beyond the "more bodies = good" level.
 
Elon says there is no reason to read between the lines when he speaks, just reads the lines. He constantly talks about population collapse and how the earth could hold billions more people:
"Earth could sustain many times its current human population and the ecosystem would be fine. We definitely don’t have “too many people"" Also: "If there aren’t enough people for Earth, then there definitely won’t be enough for Mars."

That's not just concern about age demographics. It's also not remotely rational when considering the effects of the current population on the environment and no practical solutions in place to mitigate them in the near term. More people will accelerate the degradation of our environment, especially when simultaneously improving their living standards, something a person who claims to care about humanity should also care about. Since we know that improved living conditions lead to lower birth rates one must wonder how that fits into his vision. His "analysis" doesn't seem to have gone beyond the "more bodies = good" level.
+100. absolutely. he needs to stick with engineering.
 
5BE18425-DDD4-431C-90BA-760D0DDD6A71.jpeg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.