A slightly different view from a guy who studied population at length:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LyzBoHo5EI

Very interesting watch and its had to argue against his logic. We are in the technological era after all, so unlike the pre-industrial age, having children is now a cost vs. a benefit which may act as an organic means of limiting the number of children.

Science and history demonstrate that it is infinitely sustainable, but that doesn’t make a compelling (click bait) headline.

https://reason.com/2020/02/14/u-s-fertility-reaches-all-time-low-as-people-choose-things-other-than-children/

That was a terrific video. RIP Mr. Rosling. Your thoughtful contributions are appreciated.

On a related note, I've heard it argued that as societies become more educated and wealthy, the family structure favors greater career/financial opportunities for women. And correspondingly, the cost of having/rearing children becomes a larger financial and career burden. Thus, greater societal wealth, education levels, and greater (equal?) opportunities for women result in much lower average birth rates (now less than 2 for couples in Europe and America).