Understand the bias, discover the truth in your news. Get Started
Return to Polls

Daily Poll

June 13, 2025

Is it necessary to limit population growth to protect the environment?




Total votes: 8

Comments

  1. CalmHalibut2
    48.5

    No that seems very excessive. Meant to click no, accidentally hit maybe.

    Upvote Upvote
  2. PatientTurtle5
    30

    I think that there are other ways to combat climate change and protect the environment, population caps would be too hard to enforce.

    Upvote Upvote
  3. DeterminedDolphin8
    82.5

    The population is declining, as more people are choosing not to have children or to have only one. In today’s economic climate, raising children has become extremely expensive, and there are few, if …Read MoreThe population is declining, as more people are choosing not to have children or to have only one. In today’s economic climate, raising children has become extremely expensive, and there are few, if any, incentives to do so. Therefore, population control is not a realistic or effective solution to curbing climate change. If tourist destinations like Venice, Italy, want fewer people trampling through their fragile lagoon city, they must rethink their tourism policies. But this opens up an entirely different issue. Read Less

    Upvote 1
  4. CalmMagpie1
    42.5

    Population-limiting regulations in other countries where overpopulation is a much more imminent problem have traditionally had a negative impact on society, leading to problematic differences between …Read MorePopulation-limiting regulations in other countries where overpopulation is a much more imminent problem have traditionally had a negative impact on society, leading to problematic differences between the treatment of gender in childbirth and an imbalance in the constitution of the population later on. The strife caused by these regulations seems like it would outstrip any environmental concerns, not to mention the potential to inflame other existing debates such as the ones surrounding abortion laws. Rather, it would seem more effective to ply the existing population toward environmentally-friendly practices instead of hoping a decreased population would decrease environmental burden. Read Less

    Upvote 1
  5. PatientGoat8
    12

    Population does have an impact on pollution, but if major corporations and the top 1% stopped polluting so much, stuff like this wouldnt be needed

    Upvote Upvote
  6. VibrantDeer2
    18.5

    No, I don’t believe it is necessary to limit population growth to protect the environment. I feel like there are many others way to address these issues such as reducing consumption, adopting more …Read MoreNo, I don’t believe it is necessary to limit population growth to protect the environment. I feel like there are many others way to address these issues such as reducing consumption, adopting more sustainable practices, and switching to renewable energy sources. Read Less

    Upvote Upvote
  7. SillyBear7
    19

    I think that many people would take this as an attack. I wouldn’t focus on telling stable families they have limits. I think that the most impactful way to approach this is educating third-world …Read MoreI think that many people would take this as an attack. I wouldn’t focus on telling stable families they have limits. I think that the most impactful way to approach this is educating third-world countries and poor individuals who don’t have access to information or products. It would help the women with 10+ children and young brides. Read Less

    Upvote Upvote

Leave a Reply

Copy link