Paleo Phil wrote:
>
>  When population reduction is discussed, its
> prominent advocates like Daniel Quinn are not talking about murdering
> people, they are talking about more sane options. Quinn seems about as
> peaceful as a person can be. 
>   

The only "sane" option is one in which people get to choose how they 
personally pursue life, liberty, and happiness.

> Still, since there is in the media today a lot of hot rhetoric and
> misrepresentation of people's views on population control, I can imagine how
> someone could misconstrue what I said. I'll try to be even more clear about
> what I mean regarding voluntary population reduction/control in the future.
> Overpopulation and environmental degradation are probably the two biggest
> long-term challenges the human species faces, so it is something that will
> probably be discussed more and more in the future and I'll probably get more
> chances to refine my wording.
>   
Well, one can start by eliminating welfare subsidies.  That will lower 
birth rates.  Intervention by government groups results in people making 
choices they otherwise wouldn't make.  Voluntary family size already 
exists and economic success results in lower family sizes.  Restricting 
economic growth to the paleo goals of some few would lower economic 
success and increase family size.

Steve