These graphs are showing you the results of population management. I never said we'll be growing in numbers like roaches, I was pointing out that advances in technology allow much higher population densities that would have been possible otherwise.
Look at nearly all European nations: they're much more populous now and have surplus of food, whereas they've been starving throughout mid-ages living off exact same lands.
One buck per fuck is more or less the price of not having children. If you live on $1/day, that's 4/7 of your living expenses!
Economic growth tends to reduce birthrates. European birthrates have dropped below replacement levels. The US is hovering around replacement, as is Japan and South Korea. Other developing countries are following this trend.
Technology does increase agricultural output, but within the 20'th century, rich people have fewer children.
Your problem is that you're focusing on the last ~200 years and only on countries that have successfully managed to avoid their populations outgrowing technological progress.
There have been many societies on this planet, and some of them have collapsed after peaking precisely because of population explosion due to "good times". Isolated collapses of ancient polynesian peoples have been studied particularly well.
Bill G. explained that in the begining his foundation was focused on population control. But when they discovered that the single most important factor in population was health is when they started to focus in the most crucial sickness.
His explanation is that parents simply try to optimize to have two children that can take care of them when they are old.
Look at nearly all European nations: they're much more populous now and have surplus of food, whereas they've been starving throughout mid-ages living off exact same lands.