The problem with that belief is that it is not true, at least not in any reasonably human time frame. I am speaking of your belief that we live in a finite world.
It is a common belief, true, but that does not make it so. There are enormous resources available to us, that can sustain growth for many millennium, at the least. One need only look to the solar system for that, let alone the oceans and Antarctica.
I believe that we only need to sustain increasing productivity, not populations, and not raw land. In fact, less land is being cultivated with higher productivity in the United States, than was the case 50 years ago.
I suspect that the earth will eventually be made into a wilderness park that people have to wait in line to enjoy a few weeks at a time. But that is not likely for a couple of hundred years. We certainly are capable of limiting population sufficiently to achieve that level of growth.
I'm aware that it's just a belief, not a fact. I'm aware that many before me have predicted doom...and been wrong, often ridiculously, humiliating wrong (Ehrlich).
I believe that we only need to sustain increasing productivity, not populations, and not raw land. In fact, less land is being cultivated with higher productivity in the United States, than was the case 50 years ago.
I agree 100%. If we can do this we're home free.
But even though it seems we can, it's not clear we will. So it's my function to continually point out what will happen if we don't. To point out the dangers, the signs of resistance and back-sliding.
Of course, we could both be wrong and the world could be moving in directions unseen by either of us. How many times before has that happened....