Prince William, who is expecting his third child, warns of overpopulation

Royals visit West Ham United’s London Stadium

Prince William’s continuing ability to be SO tone-deaf and hypocritical is truly astonishing. To recap William’s current life: he’s a privileged brat and his wife is pregnant with their third child, a child conceived right around the time that everyone expected them to “step up” and become full-time working royals, whatever that means. Since the pregnancy was announced, I think William has averaged about one event a week, which is probably how he defines “full-time.” His event this week? Attending a gala for the Tusk Trust and giving a speech about the dangers of overpopulation. Again, Kate is pregnant with their third.

Rapidly growing human populations risk having a “terrible impact” on the world, the Duke of Cambridge has warned. The Duke said that as a result, wildlife was being put under “enormous pressure” and called for the issue to be addressed with renewed vigour.

“In my lifetime, we have seen global wildlife populations decline by over half,” the Prince, who is known as the Duke of Cambridge, said at a gala dinner for the Tusk Trust charity in London, The Telegraph reported. “We are going to have to work much harder and think much deeper, if we are to ensure that human beings and the other species of animal with which we share this planet can continue to co-exist. Urbanisation, infrastructure development, cultivation – all good things in themselves, but they will have a terrible impact unless we begin to plan and to take measures now.”

[From Newsweek]

I’m actually very interested in the study of population growth, overpopulation and how some Western societies are actually trying to encourage citizens to have more children. The entitlements systems in America and Europe depend on a workforce equal to the retiring seniors, and there are real dangers that there will be generation “bubbles,” where not enough younger, working people are paying into entitlement and social programs. That’s one of the reasons why a healthy immigration system is so important in Western nations, by the way, because that’s how declining (white, European and American) populations grow. That’s not what William is talking about though – as we can see from his actions, he’s totally fine when royal princes and white Europeans have lots of babies. He just can’t stand it when Africans are overpopulating. It’s another royal case of “do as I say, not as I do” and a white man with power fretting over the rising population of non-white people.

…Despite William’s rampant hypocrisy, he isn’t wrong. Overpopulation IS a serious issue. It’s just that the case would be better made by someone not expecting his third child.

Royals visit West Ham United’s London Stadium

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

129 Responses to “Prince William, who is expecting his third child, warns of overpopulation”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lorelai says:

    Bwahahahaha! The headlines are great today. He is such a tone-deaf, arrogant jackass.

    I’d like to see what he comes up with when he’s “thinking deeply” about the situation 🙄

    • HH says:

      His status as a royal makes this SHOCKINGLY tone deaf. I don’t care that he’s expecting he’s expecting his third child; I care that his job REQUIRES him to procreate. It’s like having a built in excuse. However, all the plebs have a choice so he gets to lecture them.

      • Lorelai says:

        @HH, ITA. He is truly too stupid to see this. He’s not talking about people like his golden self or his posh friends with this statement. I’m sure he thinks he’s doing the world a giant favor by having more kids.

      • LAK says:

        He is EXPECTED to procreate, but it is not a requirement anymore in this modern age with spares aplenty.

      • HH says:

        @LAK -True for him individually. However, being part of a royal family does require a line succession. It would ludicrous for anyone in a royal family to lecture the general public on careful procreation.

      • Eliza says:

        They are expected to procreate, but the point of him being hypocritical is he’s at 3 instead of say 1 or 2. At 2 they are replacing themselves, with 3 they are contributing to more population.

        DoE also said he believed in personal responsibility to stop population growth and they had 4 children. Best case scenario, tone deaf runs in the family, worst case they actually believe it’s only a problem for Africa not royals.

      • nic919 says:

        He is not required to procreate. There are enough Windsors around to take up the position thanks to Liz and Phil having 4 kids and the male primogeniture law being revised.

        Once again he is tone deaf and completely oblivious to how condescending this sounds.

      • notasugarhere says:

        He was not required to reproduce; there are almost 5,000 people in the tracked line of succession to the UK throne. Not running out of possible monarchs anytime soon.

    • Megan says:

      Who writes these speeches? He has the worst staff.

      • Lorelai says:

        My guess would be that as he was saying the words up on the podium was the first time he’d ever seen them. We know he doesn’t bother to prepare before engagements. Maybe if he’d thought deeply about it beforehand, he would have realized how ridiculous it sounds coming from him.

        It is a real issue and a valid point, but he is not the person to deliver this message. He should stick to hunting for “sport.”

        I wonder if his own staff is trolling him at this point.

      • LAK says:

        Lorelai: he is frequently the wrong messenger for any speech he gives.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Royalty are going to have a problem giving speeches about a lot of social and environmental issues, aren’t they.

      • Princessk says:

        He needs to sack his speech writer. The average single western family uses up more of the world’s natural resources than a whole African village do in a month. Africans have large families because of survival and lack of adequate health and nutrition and educational facilities. Putting african wildlife before the needs of African people is a wrong move. There were lots of wild animals roaming all over UK and Europe once upon a time but nobody remembers that they were all killed off to make way for human habitat.

      • Dinah Soar says:

        Sir Sean Spicer wrote it.

    • RoyalSparkle says:

      +1 milion
      Out of touch -useless!

      Throne Idle, I am a Prince of middleton hen party decoy – Entitled. Feel he is above the better of the rest. Never mind he and waitie keen Do little continue the farce that they are ‘regular, just like us’. What a Entitled a….

  2. Radley says:

    Good Lord, they look so much older than they actually are.

    Anyway, royalty is bogus. Get a real job.

    • Juls says:

      I realize that it’s wrong to make comments on appearance, when the content of his speech is the real story. But my goodness, they are my age and easily look 10 years older. It’s baffling. Or maybe I need to adjust my own mirrors.

      • Royalsparkle says:

        Look 10 years older fretting away from AH Firest in hidout – at ways to avoid HM POW RF serving.the people, ratber than giv8ng up his Ineand the luxury grand perks so potential King Henry Sparkle Couple can get on with tbe position in waiti g to King Charles. Whiny is aging because he knows he wont survive his enablers and will lose in the end (history will repeat …)

    • Princessk says:

      They do look ten years older than they actually are but I think its the pressure of being user intense public scrutiny.

      • FLORC says:

        Its Windsor genes that make William loom older. Its goldsmith genes that make Kate appear older. And it’s smoking that makes them both appear older. Scrutiny doesn’t reach them.

      • Princessk says:

        Do they BOTH smoke? Really? I heard rumours about Kate but William surely not. Of course the scrutiny reaches them, they are human beings and as much as these type of people say they don’t read the press or go on social media, they do and Kate probably reads all this too.

  3. ncboudicca says:

    There’s always room for one more bald white guy.

  4. DiligentDiva says:

    Nice to know that William didn’t inherit his granddad’s work ethic but did inherit his racism….

    • Princessk says:

      Oh come of it….you are stretching things aren’t you. William did not write the speech which was just ill thought out. Quite ridiculous really.

  5. Amide says:

    He’s actually making a solid point on human vs animal population in East Africa anyway.
    I can tell you that this is very much an issue in places like Arusha in Tanzania and Kenya, where animals are losing territory at an alarming rate due to human population explosion and encroachment.

    • Char says:

      It’s a good point, but overpopulation in Africa comes from serious economical and social problems caused from poverty. Now, wasn’t Britain a colonizer of the continent? Didn’t they contributed to the cause of those problems? Now, it’s very easy to point and critic when you don’t even have a job (and it’s not that into animal conservation as you hunt for foxes).

      • Natalie S says:

        Yes, how about the UK pay reparations to the former colonies for the current day equivalent of the wealth and resources they plundered and then we can listen to William’s Prince-splaining.

        Actually, when I think of Prince-splaining, I think of the far superior Purple Rain Prince, so I’m going to have to come up with a better name for William’s behavior.

      • Tina says:

        I generally agree, but fox hunting is still banned in this country. I’m sure there are people who do it on the sly, but if William is one of them, he is even more idiotic than I thought he was.

      • Elaine says:

        @Natalie S


        Perfect! That is SO a thing!

      • Natalie S says:

        @Elaine. I did want Prince-splaining to be an advice series of Prince giving side-eye and life-knowledge but I suppose that can be called “Getting Right By Prince” and Prince-splaining is a better fit for William’s word salad for the peasants.

      • LAK says:

        You know, we are always agog at Kate’s word salads and inability to string 2 sentences together, but if you pay attention to William’s speeches and interviews, he is so much worse.

        Worse because he has been doing this much longer and received training. Yet, his interviews are very, VERY problematic in their foot in mouth ineptitude on top of being tone deaf. Ditto his speeches.

        He is confident in his interviews, and people focus on that rather than the content. Case in point his EAAA interview better known as #whateverworkmeans interview.

      • Enough Already says:

        How about not vacationing on the vast, (stolen) African estates of wealthy white families like those of Jecca Craig and Chelsy Davy?

      • Princessk says:

        William needs to take lessons from his father who is a master of excellence at delivering speeches. The last major one he gave in Malta on plastics in the ocean left me swooning. Nobody cares who wrote the speech its all in the delivery.

    • Eliza says:

      This isn’t just a problem in a handful of counties in Africa. Human development encroaching on wildlife is a problem in every country.

      Look at recent events in Houston, by having so many highways and parking lots built in those areas the rain waters had no where to go but up and flood. As we grow and spread throughout the earth we take away the natural environments leading to more problems everywhere.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Interestingly, I read that Houston built its freeway system in such a way that it would take on the floodwaters – the highways ARE the drainage ditches because there is no where else for the levees to overflow. The problem is rampant, unchecked development in areas likely to flood. And watch, they’ll rebuilt there again.

      • magnoliarose says:

        The problem in Houston is that they developed low land areas that aren’t suitable for development along with old dated infrastructure. The dams were not adequate.
        Add in the fact that it is hard to evacuate people out of the city and there is a mess, and it will continue to be a mess. If you have ever been to Texas, the state roads are atrocious, and the urban planning is terrible and nonsensical. Zoning makes no sense, and it is an example of what happens when Republicans deregulate everything and reject spending responsibly.
        My family in Southern Louisiana have been victims of hurricanes and floods, but they can evacuate efficiently, and it is usually due to rivers overflowing, not poor city planning.
        Texas doesn’t seem to learn though, and I am sure next year there will be more disasters and more ineptitude.

    • Amide says:

      Erm, overpopulation is not solely due to poverty. It is not even the critical variable.

      @Eliza – Very true.👍

    • Sunfuntravel says:

      Most of the places where wildlife are affected by population growth are so poor cause colonialist (UK) stole all their natural resources sooOooo

    • Princessk says:

      London and New York had wild animals roaming about that had to be culled to make way for human settlement but the people then were fortunate not to have rich westerners telling them not to encroach on land or kill the animals. Double standards as usual.

      • Tina says:

        As a Londoner, I will not speak of the foxes that I have seen merrily trotting down the road, in many different boroughs. Sometimes in broad daylight. It would be cute if they didn’t savage (human) babies.

      • Meggles says:

        Oof, not to get into a big thing, but my partner works at the Natural History Museum with a leading “fox expert” and there’s not a single verified case of a fox attacking a baby. Don’t believe the nonsense in the Daily Mail, who have an agenda to portray foxes as a dangerous predator due to political pressure to oppose the hunting ban. According to zoologists who have studied foxes and fox behaviour, those incidences were almost certainly dog attacks where the parents have lied and claimed it was a fox in order to protect the pet dog (I know at least one of the parents who claimed a fox randomly broke into their child’s bedroom and attacked unprovoked, the household had a pitbull). Foxes don’t even attack cats, they are scavengers, so it’s unlikely they’re randomly starting to eat small children, and the bite patterns don’t match foxes. It’s only rubbish and small pets like rabbits, or chickens, you have to worry about.

      • Tina says:

        Really? The incident in 2013 where the baby boy allegedly suffered a serious hand injury was reported on by the BBC, which quoted the Met. Ditto the 2010 incident where the twin babies were allegedly attacked. I hate the Mail as much as the next person, but I have no doubt in believing that foxes might come in through open doors (idiots) or cat flaps and attack human children.

  6. Ayra. says:

    Of course, his balding self took aim at Africa, the place him and his brother love *so* much. It’s not like they don’t have high mortality rate in infants..

    Here this guy is talking about overpopulation, coming from a guy that’s about to have 3 kids under 5.. future king.

  7. minx says:

    They are matchy matchy!
    I actually think William looks sort of good here for him–the open sports coat look. But his expression….

  8. littlemissnaughty says:

    I haven’t re-googled this so I hope I’m not completely wrong but if I remember correctly, it’s not necessarily the number of people that’s the issue, it’s our (Western) lifestyle and our handling (mis-handling) of natural resources. We overexploit natural resources and live lives of insane consumption. That’s why clean water will be a massive issue and why climate change is probably going to be our downfall.

    Honestly though, that makes it even worse coming from him. I’ve never travelled by f*cking helicopter. How wasteful and decadent can you be?

    • Indiana Joanna says:

      Yes, the waste in Western and Western-styled consumption is the cause a lot of ills. The Cambs are one of the biggest consumers and wasters in the world. So Bill is an idiot.

      Also, how is Bill an authority on anything? So much of the Cambs and Harry’s words, actions and image mirrors the drumps. They are not very bright hypocrites who bask in their own unearned good fortunes.

    • Sixer says:

      Water is going to be the big problem. Food tech is moving on quite well (I don’t mean the factory farming kind).

      Bill’s understanding of noblesse oblige comprises patronising and hectoring the un-noblesse, I’m afraid!

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        Water rights are the new Apple if you’re looking to invest. Scary as hell.

      • Sixer says:

        Yep. Desalination tech not proving easy, scalable or cost-possible AT ALL.

      • Lady D says:

        Canada has 20% of the world’s fresh water. Only 7% of that is from renewable resources, but I can see Canada either selling or being invaded for their water in the next 50 years. Clearly (no pun intended) we need to put more resources into desalination and soon.

      • Maren says:

        The Great Lakes in the northeast of the US have 1/6 of the world’s fresh water. Wars will be fought over water in the future. The red states like Arizona suggested pipelines from the Great Lakes the the Southwest. That suggestion dodnt go over well.

      • Princessk says:

        @Lady D…yes I also read that in the future,probably 22nd century there will be real trouble in North America over natural resources, everybody will be after Canada’s resources and the borders between Mexico and the US will disappear. A lot of it will be to do with climate change as well.

      • Nic919 says:

        There was a mini series on CBC a few years back starring Paul Gross who played an evil Canadian PM who sold Canadian water rights to the US.
        That may not have been real, but there are certain states trying to drain water from the great lakes even though they aren’t part of the basin.

      • Tina says:

        It seems to me that the Canada/Russia northern border is the most vulnerable. What kind of defences exist up there? There are a lot of ports that will open up to shipping and become extremely valuable once the ice melts, which it will do within the next decade or sooner. Has the Canadian government devoted significant resources to this?

      • Princessk says:

        @Tina…yes when the ice melts a whole can of worms will be opened about shipping rights and ownership of the area. I am sure the Canadian government is well aware of this huge looming environmental and political storm.

  9. Seraphina says:

    Of course he excludes himself because he considers himself above everyone. He is not “the public”. This is what happens when you have entitled people brought up in fairytale land with a lifestyle paid for by others.

  10. Erica says:

    William should have some one on staff who would have seen this speech and told him it would be tone deaf .Its really funny to say considering kate is keen on boosting the royal population

  11. Capepopsie says:


  12. New_Kay says:

    He is soooo arrogant. What an idiot. Clearly he is talking about a certain group of people who he feels need to decrease the number of kids they have. His family is exempt…you know royal blood and all that. What a moron.

  13. Sixer says:

    Kaiser – I’ve read a LOT of Western welfare economics and fertility literature and there is so much cognitive dissonance about the conflict between declining birth rates and immigration, you wouldn’t believe it. If you take the thought one step further and count in the inevitable future population movements due to climate change, well, the practical solutions are clear: as much freedom of movement as possible; as open borders as possible.

    The problem is persuading people of this!

    • frisbee says:

      The problem is bigotry, the problem is getting predominately white populations to accept that brown people are human beings too.

      • Enough Already says:

        Thank you Fris! This is nothing more than eugenics masked as global concern. I know a Chinese scientist who 100% believes the poor should be given reproduction permits in the future. He believes that the rise of AI will gradually reduce our dependence on humans who do the jobs that require repetitive manual labor. Not only is he dead serious but he’s a highly funded AI research scientist as well. When I argued that social class doesn’t determine human value he says that my way of thinking is correct but not for long – the lower classes provide food, shelter, waste management, construction, transportation etc so that the genetically favored upper class can take care of what is vital to society. The middle class serves as administrative support and keeps the great unwashed a layer away. But with advances in agritech and machine deep learning both the lower and middle classes will become less important.

        William and his kind would never admit to these thoughts but I can’t help but feel they think this way on some level. Be afraid, people.

    • Tina says:

      I’m pretty sure that was one of the calculations behind Angela Merkel’s decision to open Germany’s doors in 2015. Germany needs the workers.

      • Sixer says:

        I think so and I’m sure Littlemiss can weigh in on this.

        Elsewhere in Europe, you have Denmark, for example, running simultaneous “do it for Denmark” and “brown people, don’t come here or we’ll confiscate your assets” government PR campaigns.

        (Britain, of course, just hates everyone who isn’t British and STILL can’t manage to stop hating single mothers.)

        Nobody is joining even the most obvious dots. It’s all so dispiriting.

      • Tina says:

        Dispiriting is an excellent word for it. Everything that happens seems worse than the thing before. I feel like WH Auden, when he said that the 1930s were a “low dishonest decade.” Let’s hope this decade ends better than that one did.

      • Sixer says:

        We can only grasp the chinks of light as they come all too infrequently, I guess. I confess to feeling gloomy.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        I think that there were numerous reasons for her decision and I like to believe the one she gave was actually truly one of them. That it was the right thing to do.

        I’m a cynic when it comes to her though. She’s calculated as hell and that’s her strength. I believe it was optics first and foremost. We’re one of the richtest countries in the world with one of the worst recent histories. Whatever we do on immigration or refugees, we’ll be scrutinized a little more. If she had kept the borders shut, the images in the press would’ve been awful. These people weren’t going back, they were going to camp out in open fields. And here we are, rich and fat and still the Nazis and doing nothing. I know that sounds harsh but I’ve listened to every side of this debate and no other reason convinces me.

        They did try to sell us the Syrian dentist as the model refugee who would come and help our desperate job market. That would’ve been lovely but we’ve since realized that the average refugee is not a doctor. Surprise.

        Our laws certainly can’t handle this though. You can’t work if you’re waiting for your status to be confirmed and that can take a long time. Right now we’re educating people (young people) and giving them extensive job training and they don’t know if they can stay. It’s a waste of money and it’s ridiculous.

        Refugees are not a source of labor first and foremost. I honestly hate that idea. They’re human beings who are most likely traumatized and need care and then, yes, jobs. All of that is going to take decades and hard work from everyone involved. Nobody seems to be in the mood to change our laws to reflect the times though. We don’t even have immigration laws.

        If she thought this could solve the job market problem (and our pension problem), she was too optimistic or knows something the rest of us don’t. And she didn’t tell us before the election so I still think it was optics. I actually agree with her that we can do this. Of course we can. But I fear that most of us don’t want to or don’t want to put in the work.

        They have since stopped selling us this fairy tale of the solution to the demographic issues we’re facing. Sadly. Because that means we might not put our best effort forward. We’re f*cking this up.

        @Sixer: You knew I would go on a tirade. ;-) I find it interesting that nobody is talking about the fact that this will get worse thanks to climate change. 1 Million? Oh honey, it hasn’t even started yet.

      • Sixer says:

        LOL and sorry! I did know you would go on a tirade. But tirades are good. They help us understand each other better, don’t they? Which is half the battle.

        Exactly, re: climate change. And big countries like the US are going to have to deal with domestic population movements as well as international ones.

      • frisbee says:

        I didn’t think that was a tirade, I thought it was an illuminating point of view and thank you for posting.

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Canada’s bumping up its immigration targets too, and in light of the US closing its doors, Canada will be the beneficiary.

      • Sixer says:

        Canada will. I don’t deny that strenuous efforts must be made to ensure cultural cohesion, but that’s where the focus should be, not on keeping people out.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        Canada has immigration laws which are essential in this day and age. I cannot believe that GERMANY doesn’t. Christ we’re so unprepared.

  14. Llamas says:

    “Alright!” He says as he finishes his speech. “Promised the family that I’d get us some fresh duck and deer for dinner.” *picks up the shotgun* “Oh and don’t forget we need to co-exist with animals and keep their populations from declining. You all need to think much deeper and harder about your actions….bye!”

    • Sixer says:

      Quite: this is the man whose entire family supports the depredation of Scottish moorland so they can shoot birds, then burn them.

      • Llamas says:

        Bully for Bully! Maybe he was talking about the overpopulation of the animals he hunts. *rolls eyes.*

  15. Realitycheck says:

    Each north American European citizens carbon footprint is significantly higher than someone from africa, india, china. So him producing 3 lazy giant carbon emitters is contributing way more significantly to overpopulation and pollution. I really hate this family.

  16. Lila says:

    Lol , his statement reminds me of a billionaire with a private jet , warning us commoners about reducing our carbon footprint. Entitled to their opinion, but lacks credibility with me.

  17. Beth says:

    The overpopulation in central Florida is a problem. They’re building thousands of houses and apartments, but not any schools for the kids that move into the area

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      Ooh, story! Years ago was visiting Florida and read a story about how the state legislature was slashing the education budget but bumping up $ to build prisons because – they acknowledged openly – they knew that when they cut schools, crime went up.

      In Canada, schools are built along with new housing, developers have to pay fees.

  18. Tess says:

    He “has” to have children to ensure the royal lineage has heirs and hunting just so HAPPENS to be a fabulous historic royal pastime but you pores shouldn’t have children or hunt don’t you know how lucky you are to be NORMAL

    • Amy says:

      I think that he, and lots of westerners, have this idea that the animals of Africa, South America, Asia, and Australia are all more special and exotic and that’s why they need to be protected. Whereas the animals that they see and kill and displace everyday in the West are not. I feel like it’s related to fetishizing “exotic” lwomen. They’re beautiful in a different and unique way, historically difficult to get to (as in it costs lots of time and manpower to sail to Africa or South America and bring home a beautiful, exotic wife/mistress), and also a signifier of wealth and status because it would cost lots of money to travel out there, bring a woman back, and then “keep” her in the luxury needed to preserve her “exotic” beauty. I feel like these same men have transfered some of this now to African, Asian, etc animals. Those animals are different and exotic, they exist for the special pleasure of rich guys on safari, being able to afford to travel to see them signifies wealth and status. There are many endangered animals in the UK and Europe but those are never the animals pictured on the “Save the Animals” brochure or poster. They are just as important to maintaining a healthy ecosystem, but they are not as sexy or exotic. And it also helps that he, as a Westerner, can put the onus on saving these animals on the local people. “You Africans needs to stop overpopulating Africa because you’re interfering with my ability to drive around on safari and take pictures of elephants, cheetahs, and rhinos! How will I amuse myself in such a distinctly upperclass, rich person sort of way if all of the exotic animals are gone!?”

  19. L says:

    I understands what he means but my god how tone deaf and hypocritical he sounds.

    Another thing if people are so worried about overpopulation maybe they should accept women that don’t have children.

  20. Nic919 says:

    He should hang out with Leo Dicaprio more because they are both tone deaf hypocrites on this issue. Although I will give Leo some credit because he doesn’t live off taxpayer money.

  21. Olenna says:

    These two, SMDH. They’re both 2 blocks past clueless.

  22. Maria says:

    Of course he has to have at least three kids. He needs them to take over his heavy workload when he gets older. Heck, he and Waity can’t do it all by themselves!

  23. Maria says:

    As for the bit about wildlife, how can he make such a statement when he kills animals for sport.
    Beyond hypocritical!

  24. MissM says:

    This is made even worse by the fact that families in Britain who receive government assistance are only given assistance for the first two children yet William, a glorified welfare recipient, is able to breed all he wants and not have to worry about the gravy train running out.
    If he believes what he’s saying they’ll stop at 3.

    • Sixer says:

      Did you know that dreadful rape clause/two child rule also extends to kinship carers when children enter the looked-after system? So you take on your relatives kids when your relatives are in crisis so that they don’t have to go to foster care or a group home, but the government won’t give you tax credits for them! Quite unbelievable.

      • magnoliarose says:

        That is cruel. This world makes me sad sometimes. I don’t understand the cruelty and why anyone would intentionally ignore the suffering of others. When did everything turn like that in Britain? I always thought of it as a place that people at least had basic care and more social programs.
        It is depressing. :(

      • Sixer says:

        Because the powers that be know they have a vicious tabloid press that will shout about “benefit scroungers” and bamboozle the public, and because the powers that be are also useless and incompetent and pass legislation with unintended consequences.


  25. Starlight says:

    I thought the rumour mill was he only wanted two but Capricorn women are very persuasive though, I hope it doesn’t put a strain on the marriage

  26. Littlestar says:

    I was going to comment how the top 1% of the world’s population contributes more damage to the earth than the majority of the poorest but it looks like some commenters beat me to it. In other words, STFU Prince William because your entitlement is showing.

    • Trump Hater says:

      Yep if you just see the Instagrama of the super rich like Rich Kids of Instagram accounts, you can see the disgustingly wasteful consumption they have displayed there. Nvm all the carbon foot print accrued from frequent private jet, helicopter travels and having multiple luxury cars.

  27. The Original Mia says:

    Kaiser went there! Way to go! It’s totally tone deaf and hypocritical as usual of William lecturing/Princeplaining to other cultures, when he himself is guilty of the same things.

  28. perplexed says:

    When I looked at his speech, he didn’t really seem to say to stop having kids though. He talked about “infrastructure, cultivation, development, urbanization etc.”. He seemed to imply we should deal with those things so that humans and animals could co-exist rather than stop humans from having more humans altogether. I’m not sure if I’m misunderstanding what he’s saying though, as I am not an expert in this area. I’m just going by the words I saw placed in his speech.

    If he had actually said to stop having kids, I could see why he was being criticized. But it sounded more like he was saying to look for solutions that could deal with the problems that result from overpopulation rather than actually stopping procreating or voluntarily limiting the amount of kids you can have (which I think his grandfather suggested once, despite having 4 kids).

    • hmmm says:

      William asserted that wildlife was being put “under enormous pressure”. This from the guy who relishes the killing of tender, helpless birds and animals for blood sport, snuffing their lives out in the hundreds at one shooting. I can’t wait till he and his ilk are reviled and tossed out of status. And money. Let him and his kind labour in the cesspits for their sins.

    • Tina says:

      He did say specifically, “Africa’s rapidly growing human population is predicted to more than double by 2050—a staggering increase of three and a half million people per month.” So the speech was pretty tone-deaf.

      • perplexed says:

        Yes, I saw that part. But the rest of the speech seemed to be about finding solutions to urbanization, cultivation etc. and dealing with the problems that can come from rising populations. I can’t see in the speech where he actually says to stop having kids, which I think would be more problematic than simply stating a statistic he found. I can’t really figure out if he was actually offering a solution in the form of voluntary non-procreation.

        We are already at overpopulation, so someone simply saying we are overpopulated, which is fact, isn’t something I would dispute in and of itself. Elon Musk pointed out the same thing and I’m almost certain he has 5 kids. If they actually told people to stop popping out babies, that would be annoying. But they seem to be saying we should deal with what happens when those kids come out rather than not having them all. I think there is a distinction there.

        But as I am not an expert in this area, I will admit I could be misinterpreting what he is saying.

      • Tina says:

        I just think that any sensible adviser would have taken one look at this topic and advised him not to go there. Once he uttered the word “overpopulation,” the headline writes itself.

      • Mina says:

        Facts = tone deaf? The point is that the structure has to be put in place to deal with overpopulation, not that there has to be less population. Just forget who is speaking and listen to what he’s saying instead of making judgements just because he’s a lazy royal.

      • Tina says:

        He has no qualifications or credibility to make those statements. He may be right all day, but he’s a figurehead. The royals have to pick their causes carefully. It was a classic own goal – the story is about “man soon to have three children talks about overpopulation.” It’s like Bono lecturing us about poverty and the environment whilst using a private jet and Netherlands tax structures. He was 100% right, but it looks hypocritical.

      • FLORC says:

        Reminds me of the big lebowski quote…
        “You’re not wrong Walter. You’re just an asshole.” The Dude

        William isn’t wrong. Or rather the people thst wrote and researched his speech were not wrong. What’s bad is it coming from him like he’s oblivious to what’s actually happening in the world and his own actions.

    • Mina says:

      perplexed, you’re right, that’s what he said. People just stick with the headline and the snark and don’t really know much of the data it seems.

  29. hmmm says:

    Who knew that the BRF’s role would become so offensive. This is the future. These 1%ers are exposing themselves. True p0rn.

  30. Mina says:

    Overpopulation isn’t about having many kids anymore (which white europeans aren’t doing anyway, birth rates keep declining, it is an issue in parts like South America, Africa and Asia and it’s not about being racist. it’s about the lack of sex education and availability of birth control), but about people living longer. Thinking that less kids should be born to avoid overpopulation is such a misguided idea. The more population ages without a young force to support that, the worse impact it is for economy and all the things that worry scientists nowadays.

    • Maren says:

      Yes, the birth populations are highest in areas that cant support the people and where there is the worst health care and standards of living. That is a big issue still.
      However, dont lecture others when you are on # 3 child and regularly take helicopters and private jets, for work AND vacations. Put the kids in a Tesla and drive to your vacation.

      • Veronica says:

        The thing is, countries impoverished enough that their populations lack basic resources have natural population control – if there isn’t enough to go around, people, quite simply, die. That’s how every other species regulates itself on the planet.

        Overpopulation isn’t really about birth numbers or even aging at this point. It’s about resource management. We love to scapegoat people who have large birth rates, but the reality is, those areas without industrialized infrastructure are not the problem. It’s actually countries like America that are gorging themselves on the world’s resources. We are the ones creating the problem, especially because our capitalist system means that otherwise usable resources will be destroyed in order to create revenue and demand.

  31. Scarlett says:

    He really is an insufferable jerk. Work harder, think deeper ? Surely that would be a foreign concept to him.

  32. Pandy says:

    Well, considering the Duggars and others of their ilk are breeding like proverbial rabbits, I will give them a pass on only 3 children.

    • notasugarhere says:

      If nothing else, the Duggars appear to support themselves which is an enormous difference.

  33. Veronica says:

    Fun fact: industrialized nations have the lowest birth rates, but we consume the highest amount of resources per person.

    I’m almost convinced that the overpopulation argument is just the Garden of Eden 2.0, with men looking to blame women and their babymaking for why we’re getting evicted off the planet.

  34. Helen Smith says:

    The planet is becoming overpopulated but a rich man on his third child telling poor people to procreate less oftennis the wrong messenger and only half of the message. The other half is telling people in wealthy countries to consume less.

    • Trump Hater says:

      Yea his wife has a greater environmental footprint than entire villages in Africa combined. Look at the amount of times Kate has taken private helicopters, spends and spends others money on new clothes (you can’t even get her to do her job these days without the promise of new clothes), shuttles around 2 fully equipped households in both Kensington and Anmer Hall. Willie boy should just shut up.

  35. Kaz says:

    The irony of a wealthy privileged individual in the UK (with a pregnant wife, no less), speaking of the dangers of over-population is ironic to say the least. One of the problems of NGO type activity in various parts of the world is the imposition of western values and methods on populations which have a totally different culture, mindset and motivation. Over-population and animal trafficing are worthy of attention, but I am truly doubtful of the actual positive impact of someone like William, on his lofty perch, lecturing from afar.

  36. crazydaisy says:

    It’s such a shame the Prince seems to have no real commitment, zip or passion for any causes truly close to his heart, issues where he could make an impact every day. I had high hopes for him growing up to become a beloved leader, but it seems his goal is to be left alone… Maybe he just takes after his wallflower father more than his radiant Mum. Di may have been shy but she pushed through it, reached out and really cared.

    • Princessk says:

      How on earth can you describe Charles as a wallflower…lol! Charles is a hugely passionate and engaging man..Environmentalism. Architecture. Organic Farming. Painting. Gardening. Young People. Charles will be remembered as being hugely influential in all of these areas, even Harry will be remembered for Invictus but poor William still has to find his forte….

  37. Doc says:

    By definition, overpopulation is the relationship of people to the available resources. The ‘alarm’ of overpopulation raised unknowingly by most news sources, including a speech by hrh is a form of neomalthusianism.
    What people constantly fail to see is that human resourcefulness and ingenuity can and has in the past overcome many obstacles, importing goods we need to overcome a resource deficit on the territories of our own countries being an example. This is not to say that our activities when unchecked have a detrimental effect on our surroundings. The issues that proponents of overpopulation keep on repeating, such as poverty and pollution, to name a couple, are not going to be resolved by removing people. Successful, organized countries are actually ones with large population numbers. Again the number of people do not define overpopulation, as two people in the Sahara are overpopulating it, as they will mot have the resources needed.
    I believe that the mottos of the aforementioned proponents can actually have really harmful effects on many countries especially if institutionalized and financed.

  38. Hmmnottoday says:

    He has 3 kids… he’s talking about the low life losers who have 5-6 kids with 3+ different men and live off tax payers money.

  39. N. says:

    Stupid racist. Let Russel Brand grill him.