America’s goal of perpetual

population growth is Ponzi

demography

A pediatrician examines a newborn baby in her clinic in Chicago on Tuesday, Aug. 13,
2019. (AP Photo/Amr Alfiky)

Among America’s various troubling addictions, one that

has particularly worrisome consequences for the country
is its addiction to population growth.  

Population growth advocates warn of a pending crisis due

to low fertility rates, which in 2021, was 1.66 births per
woman, or about a half child below the replacement level. 

But when it comes to the climate crisis, environmental

degradation, biodiversity loss, natural resource depletion
and pollution, maintaining the same level of population
growth poses a serious threat to America’s
future sustainability. Concerned with its serious and far-
reaching consequences,
climatologists, environmentalists, scientists, celebrities an
d many others have repeatedly called for population
stabilization. 

Despite this, proponents of demographic growth have

disregarded the widely available evidence on the
consequences of population growth in both their policies
and actions, and have dismissed the notion of population
stabilization.

In February, then-Republican Texas state Rep. Bryan

Slaton introduced a bill providing gradual property tax
relief to married couples with four or more children, with
100 percent relief for those with 10 or more children.
Slaton said in a statement, “With this bill, Texas will start
saying to couples: ‘Get married, stay married, and be
fruitful and multiply.’” 

Ideas such as these support the claim that the numerous,

cited consequences of population growth are greatly
exaggerated. They argue that the repercussions —
including higher average temperatures, severe droughts
and hurricanes, excessive heat waves, floods, rising sea
levels and high tides  — should be calmly and resolutely
brushed aside.

Some 50 years ago, when America’s population reached

the 200 million mark, the U.S. Commission on Population
Growth and the American Future concluded that in the
long run, no substantial benefits would result from the
further growth of America’s population. Moreover, the
commission recommended that the gradual stabilization
of the U.S. population through voluntary means would
contribute significantly to America’s ability to solve its
problems.

Since the commission’s report, the U.S. has added more

than 100 million to its population, which today, stands at
approximately 335 million. By mid-century, the U.S.
Census Bureau expects the U.S. population to reach 400
million, or about double its size when the commission
submitted its final report to then-President Nixon and
Congress. It is expected to continue growing throughout
the 21st century, possibly reaching as much as 500 million
by 2100.

Still, any slowdown or stagnation in the growth of

America’s population is typically viewed
with panic and fear. Economic growth, advocates
claim, requires sustained population growth. In brief, they
see a growing population producing more goods and
services leading to higher economic growth. 

Calls to limit immigration in order to achieve population

stabilization are strongly resisted, especially by
businesses and special interest groups. Reducing the
level of U.S. immigration, they often claim, is incompatible
with America’s history of being a nation of immigrants. 

But beyond that, many consider population growth

essential for taxes, the labor force, politics, cultural
leadership and global power. Therefore, any slowdown in
the country’s demographic growth is met by political,
business and economic leaders ringing alarm bells and
warning of economic calamities.

Some have even claimed that population decline due to

low birth rates is a far bigger risk to civilization than global
warming. Others have stressed that worker shortages
coupled with an aging population are causing serious
problems for the solvency of the Social Security program.

The bottom line is, many of those calling for increased

population growth through higher fertility rates, as well as
more immigration, are simply promoting Ponzi
demography. The underlying strategy is to privatize the
profits and socialize the economic, social and
environmental costs incurred from the growth. By and
large, population stabilization is viewed as “stagnation,”
which suppresses economic growth for businesses and
reduces job opportunities for workers while
simultaneously contributing to worker shortages.

On the contrary, many believe that lower fertility and

smaller populations should be celebrated rather than
feared, and for good reason. In addition to positive
consequences for the environment and climate change,
lower birth rates are frequently linked to increased
education of women, greater gender equality and higher
living standards.

But as it stands, the repeated warnings about the

consequences of demographic increase appear
insufficient to modify America’s fixation on population
growth any time soon. As a result, any future U.S. policies
and programs that aim to address those consequences
are likely to be not only exceedingly costly, but also too
little and too late to mitigate their profound effects on the
nation.

Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former

director of the United Nations Population Division and the
author of numerous publications on population issues,
including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and
Differentials”.