It has great stigma since WWII for obvious reasons (desirables vs non-desirables). But I agree. I always wonder why we are trying to revert decline of amount of people in Europe, where in many countries we would have famine just if food import would stop. That does not look like good long-term solution.
But we are just putting plasters on economy by trying to increase human population, because more people means higher GDP, more workers and having ability to pay for debt and future liabilities such as pensions.
Worst of all, if we do not act (and by acting I mean having less kids, not killing anyone), population decrease will likely come in other, more violent ways (wars for resources, famine and disease).
Probably because Europe as a supposed shining beacon of enlightenment is the absolute last place that should diminish its influence in the world by producing less offspring.
You could decrease population just by removing perverse incentives associated with population growth (e.g. religious and economic power being two big examples - but fat chance of those going away).
But we are just putting plasters on economy by trying to increase human population, because more people means higher GDP, more workers and having ability to pay for debt and future liabilities such as pensions.
Worst of all, if we do not act (and by acting I mean having less kids, not killing anyone), population decrease will likely come in other, more violent ways (wars for resources, famine and disease).