Agriculture was mankind's biggest mistake (4th time)

Both Con and I are guilty of only talking about directly after the agriculture transition and today, we both seem to lack evidence from a in-between time. "Agriculture has made it possible for an extremely high population." This is absolutely correct, but because of a higher population more problems occurred. Higher population doesn't mean that people are benefiting more; it just means that more people are alive. In biological terms, by developing domestication of crops and animals, we have "removed" ourselves from the food chain/cycle. A population of predators is DEPENDANT on the population of the prey. By being able to control the prey's population, the population of "predators" was self-limited. We (humanity) controlled our own population, which turned out to be mad, we OVERPOPULATED, and eventually reached the population BUBBLE, and once it popped, mass starvation and death was abundant. Just because we controlled to food, doesn't mean that everyone was getting their share. The lower class citizen who could not support themselves and families did not get as much produce and higher class citizens who owned extensive amounts of property and wealth. In a sense, yes, agriculture could support a larger population, but most of the newly existing population was less fortunate than the ones who could afford to eat. A good example of this is what happened after WWI. American soldiers came home and had children, because there was no war to be fought, the soldiers had no work and could not pay for food, thus causing part of the great depression. Explosion of population also lead to more confined living spaces. Again, this was not necessarily a good thing. Would you rather live in a big house or small house? Most people would prefer the larger house. With an expanding population there was less room for everyone to "breath". As you know, because there are more people able to work then work available, which even today, causes issues of unemployment and sometimes poverty. Poverty lead to people resorting to theft in order to feed themselves, which lead to social issues and more and more problems. You can either have a large population of worse off people, or a smaller population of well off people, but not both. "Agriculture has led to extremely high technological growth." This is also true, but it is the same thing as saying, the more people working to get something done, the faster it's finished. If you have a group of ten people working to finish something opposed to a group of five, of course the large group will finish first. Like I said in the first round, technological advancement would have happen regardless, but with a smaller population, at a slower rate. Once hunter and gathers where able to have a sustained ability to obtain food, more advancements would happen. When you are trying to survive in the wild, you think of what is necessary, before what brings comfort. We face issues because of overpopulation today, if these issues didn't exist, it wouldn't be a problem. Farming does not produce more food than hunting and gathering? Farming does not support wild game. If one square mile of jungle can support so many large animals, plus wild vegetation, it supports more people. One square mile of farmland can support so many people, but one square mile of wildlife can support so many people, plus a population of wild game, and the population of wild game can also support so many people. I may have not made that as obvious as I thought in the second round. Starving People today still stave, it just may not seem that way to you because we live in a first world country, instead of a third world. The only reason you don't stave is because you have an income that you can use to go to the store and buy food. Without that income, you would be as worse off as everyone else who couldn't afford food. Again, heath issues related to overeating and consumption is a very "western" idea, but we (US citizens) are not the only people living on Earth, keep that in mind. Conclusion Con's biggest argument is, more people = good. As I have stated in my rebuttal, population explosion caused more harm than good. Population increase had immediate benefits, but cause long term problems that we still face today.