On that we certainly agree.
However, I hope you will forgive me for pointing out that his premises look an awfully lot like those you have posited.
He just carried them to their logical conclusions.
His premise looks nothing like what I have posited. He came from a stupid position that reality was a zero sum game, that at some point there would be too many people and then you have to decide who is contributing enough. I come from the historically proven position that reality is NOT a zero sum game, that more people contributing fully can and do create and free up more resources and there is simply no such thing as too many people.
He started from incorrect and historically dis-proven assumptions and carried them to an incorrect logical conclusion. Interestingly his incorrect assumption bear a striking resemblance to the incorrect assumptions of Marx which lead him to communism. Zero sum basis is just plain bad thinking.