That is by far the worst plan i have ever heard. do all these people just drink Mercury? there are so many ways to can actually solve this problem. they are wasting MORE resources just doing this.

Well they are the ones that let the world in chaos in first place, so I dont think they are genius in solving many problems. One side wants to reduce people to solve problems, the other side wants to avoid that because they care about the rights of each being. Which solution you think it would be appropriate for that?

reducing people tho wont solve the problem. it just puts undue burden on others to take care of the 30%. it would be wiser to make it voluntary and build up "micro" cities that are safe from the non-micro people. basicly allowing them to live normal lives within there own communities and let them still have a voice in things. if you made it voluntary i almost guarantee you that at minimum 5-10% of the world would be down for it especially if they are given the same rights at normal people.

Also, a large investment in city planning, agriculture development, and green technology would most likely solve the damn problem of food shortages and over population within a few decades. how much money and resorces are they wasting just to shrink people? Floating cities (in the ocean not sky) can be constructed, massive solar and wind farms can solve power issues, massive job programes from these massive build projects would solve unenployment issues for a time.

if you made it voluntary to become micro, build up existing systems for people who are not, and also focus on long term investments. both sides can literally get what they want. and i can bet you the people of the world would be MUCH more open to that then being picked at random to lose all your rights and become a burden on society.

"reducing people tho wont solve the problem. it just puts undue burden on others to take care of the 30%. it would be wiser to make it voluntary and build up "micro" cities that are safe from the non-micro people. basicly allowing them to live normal lives within there own communities and let them still have a voice in things. if you made it voluntary i almost guarantee you that at minimum 5-10% of the world would be down for it especially if they are given the same rights at normal people."

Sadly, with the world in the actual situation, it's hard to give someone the choice of wanting something or not, or to volunteer or not. All the world is being affected by a problem, so everyone will be affected by it. The shrinking tecnology is something "new" basically and they didn't had the time to think about everything so far. They surely pointed a solution, but not yet about the many variables about that. Basically they are desperate to solve the problem, and the problems that will appear in the future will help them to realize what must be done to solve the additional problems. This story is about shrinking and problems about that, so expect mistakes.

"Also, a large investment in city planning, agriculture development, and green technology would most likely solve the damn problem of food shortages and over population within a few decades. how much money and resorces are they wasting just to shrink people? Floating cities (in the ocean not sky) can be constructed, massive solar and wind farms can solve people issues, massive job programes from these massive build projects would solve unenployment issues for a time."

About the first solution, they probably did that and didn't worked (or because of the high population, the violence, or simply because they are dumb). About the second case, there are also people living in the water (that's why we have a shark leader). Thats their territory so it's not that easy and this will surely be explored in the future. There's no free territory without a leader and to allow others to live in a different territory, it would need permission of the other leader to do that. So it's a slighty complex situation.

"if you made it voluntary to become micro, build up existing systems for people who are not, and also focus on long term investments. both sides can literally get what they want. and i can bet you the people of the world would be MUCH more open to that then being picked at random to lose all your rights and become a burden on society."

There are always good people that wants to help, but in the true nature of the beings, many would not want to lose their rights or capacity of power, so for these leaders, forcing a change is better than transform this into a option. If others doesn't agree with them, the results will never be created.

and that is politics

for sure lol

Throw the media into it and it makes less sense though.

A little spoiler... Fake news will also be in the middle of this mess xD

Am not surprised.