"Environmental issues must be weighed against political and economic health"?

OK, humans are grossly overpopulated, have unnaturally polluted every bit of our planet, consume so much and take up so much space that there's virtually nothing left nor any room for other species, and have caused numerous other environmental harms.

So, once humans lower their population to a small fraction of its current size and stop their unnaturally destructive behaviors, they can have all the political and economic health they want.

"Once humans lower their population...THEY..."

Are you not human?  What about the pronoun WE?  

Wouldn't our planet be much better off if WE HUMANS became extinct?  Did humans NATURALLY occur?  Are we not also part of the "natural" environment?

I used "they" instead of "we" because I don't support agricultural or industrial society, and I think it's no less than criminal to have more than two kids considering the extreme human overpopulation that exists.

The Earth would be far better off without humans, with the unlikely but possible exception that if humans greatly elevated their consciousness soon so that they 1) began limiting their families to one or no children, 2) began making ecological restoration and non-humans THE priority until such time as the planet is back in some semblance of ecological balance, and 3) gave up their materialistic, selfish, greedy ways and gave priority to all life instead of things like money and material goods, then we could possibly be more help than harm.

WE all assume that humans naturally occur, but I don't know.  I used to think that I must be from another planet, because I can't relate to the vast majority of people.  After reading "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, I realized that it's probably the vast majority who aren't from here, which would explain why they care more about other things than the Earth or the life upon her.

As far as being part of the natural environment, modern humans left that long ago.  Even agriculture is not natural, so the only people who are part of the natural environment are the tiny fraction of humans who are still hunter-gatherers.  As for hypermodern people like us, we are DEVO (devolved into a race of robots), as evidenced by this type of communication.

 How do you not support agricultural or industrial society?  Did you grow your computer in a garden or magically produce it out of thin air?  Where does your food come from?  And how does it get to you?  Do you walk to the farm and pick it  yourself or graze or what?  How many changes of clothes do you own or do you go without?  
 When humans greatly elevate their consciousness (and that is an ongoing process.  The existence of this forum is one of many signs that we are growing/evolving/becoming aware that we a part of something far greater than ourselves)we will contribute to ecological balance and place far less emphasis on material posessions and money.
 Have you ever read anything by deep ecologist Arne Naess?

"we are growing/evolving/becoming aware that we a part of something far greater than ourselves)we will contribute to ecological balance and place far less emphasis on material posessions and money."

This theme keeps repeating itself.  Happiness comes from quality of life not quantity of consumption and posessions.  

A big turn over from standard of living measured in terms of quality of life (rising from living better with less).. rather than in income levels and consumption.

Better food, not more food than we need.  Better transportation, not more fuel and luxuries consumed per mile traveled.

Better government, not more corrupt crony contracting.