The more I listen to all the pundits and assorted other opinioneers, the more I conclude that there is one factor that is always left out of discussions about the environment, energy, socio-economics, and touches pretty much everything having to do with all of the ills afflicting humanity. The logical bottom line is that until population stabilizes, world-wide, humanity will constantly be chasing after solutions to an ever-increasing number & severity of problems. Get it through your heads everyone, the Earth is FINITE! Who in their right mind expects, for example, that technology will always find the answer to our problems? Can anyone imagine this country with 500 million people? The world with 20 billion? Well, sooner or later it's coming, and I'm sure glad I won't be here to see it. Sure, the carrying capacity of this planet is far larger than where we're at now, but who wants to live in a world at its carrying capacity? Mankind has the ability to substantially prevent & cure disease, (so far), and extend life spans to who knows where, but is this what our goal should be? The natural world has built-in regulation that ensures populations of species are in balance with the environment, but not so with mankind. The U.S. has passed 300 million. What do you think that our founding fathers would have said if asked whether the constitution they came up with would work for 300, 400, or 500 million of us? Democracy as we know it would be crushed under the weight of so many people. It's not puzzling that China is not a democracy. To me, the choice is simple: either the population stabilizes at a sensible number, or this pie of ours will get divided up into so many pieces, that our quality of life would go right down the toilet. Of course, there's always the Doomsday solution. Maybe a disease that nobody can find a cure for, or a celestial catastrophe, or God forbid, nuclear war. But I say that it's better to prevent more people from coming into existence than to have more people merely existing. Many believe we are slowly losing our freedoms, and I agree. This is a direct consequence of the pie pieces getting smaller. I doubt that with our form of government any serious discussion of population stabilization can ever take place, because it would be in direct conflict with our most basic tenets of privacy and the pursuit of happiness. This is why I am not optimistic about the future, and why I'm glad to have lived when I have, and the reason I brought no children into existence. Where am I wrong?