Ayn Rand fan Paul Ryan uses a Takers versus Makers meme, dividing US citizens into the very productive, such as hedge fund managers, and those who are on a government dole such as recipients of aid to the disabled and social security recipients. Unionized public employees are lumped into Takers too.
The irony of this self-characterization is that Ryan epitomizes Dominator Culture, identified by Riane Eisler, where power means taking by force from those lower in the hierarchy and from nature. This contrasts to Partnership Culture, where power is identified as the power to create, to produce, to make.
Takers versus Makers really is the underlying issue for sustainability, both in terms of taking from nature and in reproductive "rights". As long as reproduction is framed from a Dominator perspective, from a male-dominance perspective, overpopulation will always be an untouchable third rail in public discussion. Sperm is cheap. Males evolved to maximize reproduction by inseminating as many females as possible. This isn't a question of blame or put down, it's natural selection from a context in which we depended upon predation, disease, and starvation to keep population balanced with resources. Females, by definition, invest more in reproduction and therefore put themselves more at risk to protect the future of the young. In Partnership Culture elder women make political decisions for the common good, where men and women are equally valued. Women are the ultimate makers. When women share power, societies eschew warfare for building and creating.
Now that overproduction has itself become a threat to human survival, removing the real takers from the seat of power is important to make a measure of globally fair population control possible, for a start to make it even imaginable.
Imagine the 12 trillion dollars, currently sequestered in tax havens by the super rich, released to fund global adaptations to climate change, which includes some form of safety net for the most disadvantaged who will be asked to give up having large families to guarantee their old age. You couldn't even think in those terms, could you? It sounded crazy. Redistribute wealth held by rich white folks from developed countries to the poorest people in developing countries - why that would mean the end of the world as we know it!
The thing is, we're already at the end of world as we know it. Worldwide, the area of land subject to weather extremes has increased from .1% to 10%. In another decade it's projected to reach 16.7%. In the US the category of exceptional drought wasn't even used before 1980. Look at the extent of exceptional drought the past week:
The entire normal curve of temperature is moving toward higher temperature and at the same time squashing down (reflecting greater variability).
This is what you happens when the vast majority of human beings and the planet itself are exploited by those at the top of the Dominator hierarchy for their own power. The supreme Takers are the 0.001%. As long as the Takers are in charge this curve will continue moving toward ever more extreme change. Even after we revolt in favor of fairness instead of hierarchy, momentum will long continue devastating Earth's carrying capacity.