Family planning is effective when there is greater prosperity, which explains why richer countries tend to have lower birth rates. The bad news is that greater prosperity also means over-consumption, which negates the benefits of having lower birth rates.

On top of that, a global capitalist system requires increasing production and consumption of goods in order to maintain economic growth. That means the prosperous middle class, which makes up only a small portion of the global population, can only maintain their earnings as long as the middle class grows.

My understanding of family planning is that it is effective when offered. Critics tend to be presumptuous about the wishes of women in developing countries, usually presuming that such women want to have lots of kids for all manner of reasons.

<The bad news is that greater prosperity also means over-consumption, which negates the benefits of having lower birth rates.>

What does this mean? Does it mean that Tokyo and Dharavi are on a par? It also makes me wonder what sort lives people should be living. I myself am a technical optimist and have no guilt about my consumption. Rather, I see technological progress as the driver of prosperity, and I have no desire to have a Year Zero life.

You might also note that capitalism has no requirement for population growth. Surely even a cursory glance at economies would suggest that technical development has much more to offer than ballooning populations.

*My understanding of family planning is that it is effective when offered*

Exactly!