Wrong. Everyone who has a CHOICE between buying food at the supermarket and killing it, will buy it. Hunting is a sport now, not a need. Those who kill their food, need to do so to live.
Better off than they were 100 or 1000 years ago.
Really? Where?
Population growth in the US is slowing. Same is first - world Europe. Population grows (by definition) where it can be accommodated. In the last 50 years, the fastest growing populating was Saudi Arabia, because they had lots of money and capacity for growth. Now they are slowing down; the capacity is filled. Therefore, exponential growth will never ever ever happen without pre existing capacity - growth MUST by definiton follow capacity. It cannot create the capacity.
I have employees in China. I have some familairty with it. So I have to ask:
What does Earth's natural capacity have to do with Chinese lawmaking? Do you really seriously believe that China enacted those laws to protect EARTH's resources? hahahahahahahahahaah China is the biggest polluter on the planet.
Those laws were a means of the Chinese Communist party keeping power and speak nothing of Earth's capacity. You also further assume that Chinese collectivism is the optimal way to support a population. Again, WRONG.
FYI in the agricultural areas of China, the one child policy was never enforced.
Again, better than it was 100 years ago. The proof that it is better is very simple: their population is INCREASING. if it were so horrible, population would decrease, because they would die without reproducing. The very existence of an increase in population disproves your idea, dreg.
Cost? Stuff just keeps getting better.
You've thus far offered zero proof that this is happening. The examples you have attempted to use to support your position are easily discredited.
If they understand it so well, why do the fish keep biting the hook?