Jasper wrote:
This is counteracted by the fact that, in most civilized countries (term used as usually intended, don't nitpick me), birth rates and death rates are approaching unity.
But the earth can still support a far greater population density than it could otherwise. The difference between the with-tech population and the without-tech population is the number of people who would be dead, but for the presence of technology.
And in response to D Abyss:
How can you question the superiority of the modern day? Are we still cursed by a lower class which finds itself in such dire straights that its youth runs off to join the king's army, only to be sent to further his ambitions in foreign adventures, there to die and rot? Are we still so... oh, okay, bad example, moving on.[/political innuendo]
Take, for example, education. The institutionalizing of education has widely been considered a mistake by those who are subjeced to it, for they (at least, the lower class ones) are no longer free to hunt, swim, and frolic, as they were up until the mid (late?) nineteenth century. However, this allowed them (at least, the smart ones who had some drive) later in life to compete on a more even footing with the children of the wealthy, who were blessed with personal tutors, textbooks, and plentiful supplies of paper and ink. This institutionalizing of education was in large part due to the need to have a moderately well educated labor force to work the contraptions of the industrial revolution, with the happy side effect, as I mentioned before, of allowing some of the students (again, the smart, driven ones) to challenge their social betters. This, I think, was good for humanity.
_________________
Quote:
"In real life, you don' have a Subterfuge skill above one." - Phill
"What?! You spent THREE YEARS believing that I didn't masturbate!" - Steven