> We could be billions more if we chose to live this way.

This line of reasoning is problematic as it just delays the stabilization. Maybe we could have a few billion more people now but surely there must be a limit somewhere. 10B, 50, 100? Sooner or later we'll have to stabilize.

> For some reasons, all the people I know who campaign for population stabilization/reduction are among those with the worst footprint.

To be clear, I personally believe we have to both stabilize the population AND dramatically reduce footprint per capita.