Suicide is skyrocketing in young people

[PC2]

It's simple really. The more people are born = the less dignity the rest have. 7 billion was probably the critical threshold after which everyone just becomes a replaceable drone and you can forget about having any dignity at all.

Stop breeding like fucking rabbits and we'll have enough resources per capita to ensure a comfortable existence for everyone without having to prostrate yourself at the mercy of exploitative capitalists every day.

Dude there's no such thing as a population problem, that's entirely a myth. The only real limit to progress is how fast people make new products and services, push science and tech, etc.

Also we need a vastly better child rearing and educational philosophy. The K-12 school system is complete garbage that makes kids hate the learning process. It's need to be less structured and kids need to have more agency in terms of pursuing their academic interests from a young age. What we want is differentiation and to stop using school as a cookie cutter.

[d00mGuArD]

Dude there's no such thing as a population problem, that's entirely a myth. The only real limit to progress is how fast people make new products and services, push science and tech, etc.

If a country like the U.S. had double the population, it would produce much much much more pollution. So population is a problem. A very big one.

They should actively work to reduce their population (and thus pollution). Thankfully the birth rate is already such that their population should be decreasing

[Lochton]

(Source)

What do you think is a viable solution to the epidemic of young people committing suicide? I'm honestly somewhat disappointed that this subject had largely only been covered in passing (if at all) by the mainstream media, especially compared to other youth-related topics such as Juul, it seems pretty weird that the media and society seems more afraid of teens and young adults vaping than it is about them taking their own lives en masse.

Do you think there's a correlation with an increase in academic pressure and/or a decrease in childhood autonomy and privacy and the drastic increase in youth suicides?

I would suggest free education instead of a wall, less pressure on the young. Free healthcare, less pressure and more posibility of daring to talk to a professional without worrying about a huge bill.

[InTheEnd]

Isn't it just another population control behaviour?

[Knolan]

I would suggest free education instead of a wall, less pressure on the young. Free healthcare, less pressure and more posibility of daring to talk to a professional without worrying about a huge bill.

So basically turn the US into Europe where the suicide rate is higher?

Edit: I do agree that better access to mental health for the young should be available.

[Bumbasta]

Social media, increased competition on the labour market, gloablization and digitalization are all factors contributing to this. It's a pity. I still believe that people were happier pre industrial revolution. Even though we died younger, saw less of the world and were generally more ignorant.

[Graeham]

There's a lot of contributing factors, I'd wager. In many countries, society has advanced considerably - but in some regards, I'd argue that it has regressed.

[sirmixalot]

So basically turn the US into Europe where the suicide rate is higher?

Edit: I do agree that better access to mental health for the young should be available.

I highly doubt free healthcare and education increase suicide rates...

[Draco-Onis]

If a country like the U.S. had double the population, it would produce much much much more pollution. So population is a problem. A very big one.

They should actively work to reduce their population (and thus pollution). Thankfully the birth rate is already such that their population should be decreasing

False you could actually triple the US population and produce less pollution, the reason is that everything in the US was made and tailored for corporate profits. For example the reason we have so many cars on the road is because the car companies early on lobbied the politicians to build highways and abandon plans for a nationwide transit system like most modern countries have. As a result the poor bear the burden of owning a car as a lot of the US has virtually no or broken public transportation. The same goes for emissions standards which are much lower than other countries and our garbage disposal systems which are riddled with inefficiencies and corruption. There's a rather long list of things that screw regular people like allowing companies to dump toxic waste into waters which play a larger role in the amount of pollution produced than the number of people around. You can look at more green countries and see the huge difference for per capita even things you wouldn't think about like our broken health care system add to the pollution a regular person puts out.

It's all designed to line the pockets of the rich and corporations while we fight over whether gay people should be allowed to use public bathrooms.

[Grimbold21]

Social media

[d00mGuArD]

False you could actually triple the US population and produce less pollution, the reason is that everything in the US was made and tailored for corporate profits. For example the reason we have so many cars on the road is because the car companies early on lobbied the politicians to build highways and abandon plans for a nationwide transit system like most modern countries have. As a result the poor bear the burden of owning a car as a lot of the US has virtually no or broken public transportation. The same goes for emissions standards which are much lower than other countries and our garbage disposal systems which are riddled with inefficiencies and corruption. There's a rather long list of things that screw regular people like allowing companies to dump toxic waste into waters which play a larger role in the amount of pollution produced than the number of people around. You can look at more green countries and see the huge difference for per capita even things you wouldn't think about like our broken health care system add to the pollution a regular person puts out.

It's all designed to line the pockets of the rich and corporations while we fight over whether gay people should be allowed to use public bathrooms.

Could is the key word. That is in words and discussions.
In real life, increasing the US population will mean more pollution.

here is Co2 emissions per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ons_per_capita

Even if they implement all the standards you say. Even if they lower emissions from 16 per capita to 8 or 10 per capita like in EU.
The next day 400million people will produce 400x10 tons = 4000
while 800million people will produce 800x10 = 8000.
more population, will produce more pollution! It is a certainty. Population is a problem for the environment.

IN ADDITION to the other environment thingies they should be doing,
countries will high emissions should be trying to reduce population (or at least not increase it)

[Draco-Onis]

Could is the key word. That is in words and discussions.
In real life, increasing the US population will mean more pollution.

here is Co2 emissions per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ons_per_capita

Even if they implement all the standards you say. Even if they lower emissions from 16 per capita to 8 or 10 per capita like in EU.
The next day 400million people will produce 400x10 tons = 4000
while 800million people will produce 800x10 = 8000.
more population, will produce more pollution! It is a certainty. Population is a problem for the environment.

IN ADDITION to the other environment thingies they should be doing,
countries will high emissions should be trying to reduce population (or at least not increase it)

What are you talking about? did you lose the conversation you were complaining about doubling and I said tripling it wouldn't matter if we had the proper systems in place. Can you read next time? The EU as a whole doesn't have an universal system in place those are 27 countries with 27 different systems, factors and issues of their own you are better off looking at individual cases there are countries who have already achieved zero emissions.

The problem is not population but sustainability, efficiency and that is a systematic issue that governments have failed to tackle in different ways depending on the country mostly due to corporate influence or short term cost concerns.

[Dendrek]

As a society we have taken something from the youth... yes, part of it is unsupervised play but a bigger part is we have taken their drive... their desire to do anything. When no matter how hard you work at something everyone receives the same trophy you have no incentive to succeed. There is no reason to push yourself to improve when everyone is treated the same regardless of outcome. We should be teaching merit over adversity... instead we teach conformity over adversity. So what did you expect would happen. They would grow up well adjusted? No. Conflict brings growth. Without conflict at earlier ages they are not equipped to deal with any challenges later in life... it's easier to give up.

I think what you're saying is the opposite of the real issue. Granted, it's true that feeling like you can't progress no matter what you do is definitely a legitimate and depressing concern for young people. But I really doubt young people are thinking to themselves, "Man, I wish I could work HARDER (and be proportionally compensated for it)." They don't have the drive to be millionaires. Being middle class would be good enough for most. (But the middle class is dying out.) Most probably just want to work steady jobs and live steady lives. But that -- basic stability -- seems to be impossible to obtain anymore.

However, I feel like the real message behind your post is not "hard work isn't being rewarded" but rather that "being lazy is being too heavily rewarded". In other words, it seems like you're indirectly arguing against things like minimum wage, government regulations, affordable health care, etc. So it appears you're saying everyone is starting off at too high a level to want to work hard. Whereas I believe the truth is that there's too low a cap to success (for most) for them to feel there's any hope for their futures.

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't it just another population control behaviour?

Yes because the US is currently really suffering from overpopulation. What with the rising decline in birth rates.

With the way things are going, the US might have to resort to a one-child-policy just to insure people are actually having kids.

[d00mGuArD]

What are you talking about? did you lose the conversation you were complaining about doubling and I said tripling it wouldn't matter if we had the proper systems in place. Can you read next time? The EU as a whole doesn't have an universal system in place those are 27 countries with 27 different systems, factors and issues of their own you are better off looking at individual cases there are countries who have already achieved zero emissions.

The problem is not population but sustainability, efficiency and that is a systematic issue that governments have failed to tackle in different ways depending on the country mostly due to corporate influence or short term cost concerns.

I am saying you are wrong. Just because you SAY trippling wouldn't matter, does not make it so! It makes it "some dude on the internet said something"

Even if we had all proper systems in place, more population will be producing more pollution. I linked you the table per capita, and did you napkin math to help you realize it.

Please link the countries you say that have achieved zero emissions. I am very curious to see which are they. I'll wait!

[Puzzlesocks]

The solution is: Wages must be such, that a family can survive and raise kids with only one of the two parents working (no matter which one. maybe only the wife is working, maybe only the husband is working. but only one. )
Society assumes that both parents will be working, and salaries have adapted to it. And it is huge problem and huge stress for families.

Kids will be much much better off with one of the two parents at home (again: no matter which one). For that we need to change the entire mentality of everyone so that the salaries adapt to this if it becomes a thing.

This just stems from the "GDP is all that matters" line of thought. We currently value the work of stay at home parents and caretakers at $0. We live in a strange society when we would rather have both parents work full time, and hire someone else to take care of the kids, the disabled, or the elderly. It's one thing in a small community where you grow up around the same small group of people your whole life and make community connections. But we have reduced it to random people doing a job for money, instead of to help the community, in a city of tens of thousands or even millions.

[Draco-Onis]

I am saying you are wrong. Just because you SAY trippling wouldn't matter, does not make it so! It makes it "some dude on the internet said something"

Even if we had all proper systems in place, more population will be producing more pollution. I linked you the table per capita, and did you napkin math to help you realize it.

Please link the countries you say that have achieved zero emissions. I am very curious to see which are they. I'll wait!

You can simply google it there's even one country that is carbon negative due to policy and geography but I will ask you the other question, if your dream becomes reality and people stop having kids. How do you plan to keep economies from collapsing from the weight of increasingly older and growing existing population? Euthanasia? because GDP will become negative while debt and societal costs will keep going up.

[d00mGuArD]

You can simply google it there's even one country that is carbon negative due to policy and geography but I will ask you the other question, if your dream becomes reality and people stop having kids. How do you plan to keep economies from collapsing from the weight of increasingly older and growing existing population? Euthanasia? because GDP will become negative while debt and societal costs will keep going up.

There is no country in Europe (yes you said europe) with zero emissions. I don't believe you. You were just lying. I'll wait for you to link it.

My dream is not to stop having kids. Nor euthanasia or any of the things you say.
Most countries with high emissions already have low birth rates. They won't have growing population, unless we artificially add population to them. We simply won't do that!

The environment does not care if the cost goes up. We need to stop thinking about money and do things that matter for environment. Yes there will be cost if we want to breath fresh air. So be it!

[smityx]

Populations will self correct one way or another thru various means if we don't control it ourselves. War, famine, disease.

[Elegiac]

Populations will self correct one way or another thru various means if we don't control it ourselves. War, famine, disease.

No.

Malthusianism is pseudoscience and repeating myths like this just encourages gross inaction in the face of crisis. See: the English response to the Potato Famine.

[Rasulis]

Keeping in mind the old adage that causation does not imply correlation, City Lab did an interesting article on youth suicide.

Teen Suicide Rates Are Higher In States Where More People Own Guns

The study also looks carefully at what researchers have dubbed a “substitution effect,” by which the prevalence of guns would cause a change from other methods to guns, but not in the overall youth suicide rate. It did not find evidence of this. As stated in the study, “a higher prevalence of gun ownership is not associated with merely a shift from non-firearm to firearm suicide, but instead it is actually associated with an increase in the overall suicide rate.” Michael Siegel, one of the study’s authors, noted, “Suicide among youth can be an impulsive behavior. If you can get past that moment of time, you can have a change of mood. Other methods are not as quick or lethal [as guns].”

Causation may not be correlation, but there is definitely a strong correlation shown on the scattergraph below.