Although the Jan. 5 editorial “Slow population growth may hurt the economy” did a solid job of recognizing how important a decrease in the U.S. population should be, it neglected the magnitude of positivity this change can make.

As a young citizen who worries for and cares about the future of the environment, I cannot help but see a decrease in population as a way of slowing the human effects on climate change. I understand that a high population provides a substantial number of people for necessary jobs, but the relationship between the demand for jobs and qualified workers to fill them is linear, not inverse. Why should the United States revert to its normal trends of population growth when the country is running out of necessary resources?

A decreasing population would naturally buy the United States more time to use the limited amount of resources we have, to find a bipartisan plan of attack against climate change and to create legislation to protect the environment. The future of this planet is in danger. A decrease in population in one of the most influential countries would be constructive.

Jordan Atkins, Pittsburgh

Contrary to the Jan. 5 editorial “Slow population growth may hurt the economy,” slower population growth provides an opportunity for us to lift up the next generation so we can have a healthy, skilled, productive workforce. If the United States needs more workers to handle tomorrow’s challenges, let’s focus on the 13 million children trapped in poverty, many of whom suffer from poor nutrition and lack proper medical care. Parents struggling to keep their heads above water often aren’t able to give each child proper time and attention, which means they are not prepared for school. Often, they start behind and never catch up.

Investing in people is the key to a bright future.

John Seager, Washington

The writer is president of Population Connection.