Population control called key to deal

[Spartacus]

Re: Population control called key to deal

The though of 2 centarians F^*^*^G fills me with a visual horror I can not describe.

On a more serious note. I say we sacrifice all the population control proponents first to control population.

read it again ... I think he was suggesting 3, 4, 5 & 6 - somes

my guess would be you were not a fan of Harold & Maude ...

[jacobdcoates]

Re: Population control called key to deal

I am not a fan of Harold&Maude. I will have to admit that I had to google it. I only read the description of the film. I will have to say it will not make my Saturday evening view list, although I reserve the right to change my mind when I am eighty(provide that I am still alive and in full control of my faculties).

Population catastrophes assume no new technology to be able sustain more people or Wars to reset the population back a couple of billion. I think the probability of both are high. Especially, given that the world is looking resource constrained in the short term, I think that the medium term future, definite hold a major war of some kind.

[Rajiv]

Re: Population control called key to deal

Wars to reset the population back a couple of billion.

That is in fact a Population catastrophe -- imagine 1 of every 3 friends and relations getting killed over a short period of time. Think again if you think you will be insulated from the effects of that!

[Ghent12]

Re: Population control called key to deal

Population catastrophes assume no new technology to be able sustain more people or Wars to reset the population back a couple of billion. I think the probability of both are high. Especially, given that the world is looking resource constrained in the short term, I think that the medium term future, definite hold a major war of some kind.

I think you're exactly right. Some things I find disturbing about those predicting the future is that they seem to be so locked into the present. As if the only thing to occur will be more and more people. One thing you have to consider is that more people means more minds which directly translates into an increase in global creativity and innovation. Unless some form of global dark age takes root, I think the future will potentially be brighter than the past (maybe not as much for the FIRE-gutted nations).

[SamAdams]

Re: Population control called key to deal

Are those of you in support of these policies really thinking this through? What is the result of over population you fear? How far would you go in support of coercive global population restriction and enforcement? How many of you have siblings or more than one child? Is China really the political model we want to emulate world wide?

I would submit that the larger issue is natural resource consumption or pollution not overpopulation per se. At some point theoretically humanity could have so many individuals on this planet that there literally would be no room for anyone more or other species and I could see that being an issue, but we are far from overpopulation really causing a scarcity of physical space. The places where population is a problem - 3rd world nations - I don't think are the places environmentalists are concerned about? They are more worried about places like the US where population is low and on the decline, but resources are aggressively consumed. As nations industrialize the population slows and consumption can increase. The issue is natural resources and pollution not population. A lot of environmentalists seem to suggest that overpopulation is "harming the Earth". As George Carlin would say this is BS. The Earth has been around for billions of years before us, and our modest species is doing little to currently endanger the existence of the planet Earth for another several billion years. Is it the polar bear (or insert favorite animal species here) people are worried about? I can certainly empathize with that but shouldn't we be more worried about our fellow humans or are you placing more value on animals than humans? Or is it your fellow human that you are worried about? Again I would say it is an issue of natural resource consumption and pollution that is threatening our fellow human - not the existence of more humans.

If the issue is really natural resource consumption/pollution and the resulting scarcity of natural resources and low quality of life, is coercive population control the best answer? Forcing people to choose life or death for others? Centrally planned economies have always been less efficient in allocating resources than free markets - why do we not let free markets reign and allocate resources to everyone? Isn't that more humane than bureaucrats deciding who gets to live and die?

The only nations where there would be any serious enforcement of population control policies are places where there are already highly industrialized economies. In other words - they want to impose population controls in the US but will not likely start limiting population in the Sudan. But in either case free markets will do more to help with the effects of population growth than one child policies. In the US one child policies will mean each person will likely consume more per capita. In the Sudan one child policies will condemn most of those populations to elimination given high infant mortality and low life expectancy. You only get so many chances to reproduce. Bureaucratic control over child births in the Sudan will not cure the environmental issues faster than it will kill off the parents of those children.

Part of the pollution issue is the tragedy of the commons - no one owns the ocean or many rivers so who cares if I dump my toxic waste there? If we allowed private individuals to own portions of the ocean or air wouldn't many of them defend these areas much better than the government does? If we allowed these people to sue corporations (who are granted government enforced liability protection) for infringing on their property with noxious gas or toxic waste - would that not curb pollution? Wouldn't true free markets give people economic rationale for limiting their offspring to what they can economically support (usually people will only support if they can raise children with the same or better quality of life as they currently have) as it has done in every single industrialized nation on this planet? Welfare policies like those in the US subsidize reproduction. Projections show an asymptotic slowing of the population in the coming decades. As stated before the issue is not population.

Yes there are a lot of people on this planet. Aside from luxury goods, they most need two resources: food and water. We are not in short supply of chickens, cows or if we had to resort to it, bugs. The Earth is also mostly water. Both food and water are priced largely due to the energy input to deliver them to you in a healthy way. Other natural resources that might be needed for high quality of life might be scarce on our planet but I would guess are in no short supply within our solar system. With cleaner energy technology and development of space faring technology I suspect we will have plenty of natural resources to live quite comfortably for a long time to come.

The issue is natural resources and pollution that result from our current population. If we refuse to pay the premium that using scarce resources requires we will never allow the market forces that drive innovation and efficiency. If we resort to violence and coercion we will promote what it is that we profess to protect - that is quality of life for our fellow human.

Those of us in support of a coercive global control and enforcement of population - how far would you go? Why stop at limiting who can have how many children? What if that doesn't do enough "saving" of the environment? Would you comply with the next bureaucrat who shows up at your door and explains that you or your family have exceeded your footprint and need to be "reduced"? If the nation democratically votes your town to be eliminated to protect the environment - would you be OK with that? How is this much different in principle than going to war with another nation over oil? All these scenarios in my mind are morally unacceptable. Individual liberty will do more for the environment and fair allocation of resources than central planning. The US should end its coercive policies, war mongering and its interference on the economic life of its own people - and we may suffer a temporary deterioration of our quality of life, but our ingenuity and ability to adapt will serve us much better in the long run than environmental policies from the UN.

[Kadriana]

Re: Population control called key to deal

The average woman I know has no desire to have 8 children. I certainly don't feel like getting pregnant again. Give women the freedom to have less children and you'll see less people being born.

[cjppjc]

Re: Population control called key to deal

The average woman I know has no desire to have 8 children. I certainly don't feel like getting pregnant again. Give women the freedom to have less children and you'll see less people being born.

Some women are well above average.


http://www.examiner.com/x-25310-Litt...gency-Csection

Michelle Duggar, star of TLC's 18 Kids and Counting, gave birth to her 19th child three months premature in a Little Rock, Arkansas hospital Thursday night. Michelle's baby was not due until March 18.
Michelle was airlifted to UAMS hospital over the weekend for gallstone problems. Josie Brooklyn Duggar was born at 6:27 p.m. Thursday, weighing one pound, six ounces. Baby Duggar is currently in the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit.

[Kadriana]

Re: Population control called key to deal

Some women are well above average.


http://www.examiner.com/x-25310-Litt...gency-Csection

Michelle Duggar, star of TLC's 18 Kids and Counting, gave birth to her 19th child three months premature in a Little Rock, Arkansas hospital Thursday night. Michelle's baby was not due until March 18.
Michelle was airlifted to UAMS hospital over the weekend for gallstone problems. Josie Brooklyn Duggar was born at 6:27 p.m. Thursday, weighing one pound, six ounces. Baby Duggar is currently in the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit.

I didn't know she gave birth. I'm wondering if that will be her last. Michelle Dugger is the rare exception in this country. How many people choose to only have one or none in the US. I was read that Japan is trying to get more of its citizens to have children.

Now, you compare that to countries where a 12 year olds have to marry a 45 year old men and a husband kill her with little punishment because she didn't obey him.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Population control called key to deal

In my view, it is already too late -- we missed the bus 30 years ago -- and will reap the consequences for doing so!


Basics of Human Population Growth -- We are turning the corner - but not fast enough -- If we were where we are today - thirty years ago, we may have safely turned the corner.

I fear you are correct, but the consequences of being correct are so horrifying, that possibly our last act of immorality would be to sit back and accept it.

Despite so many lessons from history; just as humans seem to be incapable of accepting their own mortality, humanity seems incapable of accepting an end to their civilization.

[jacobdcoates]

Re: Population control called key to deal

Rajiv,

Your assuming I have friends and that I love most of my of family enough to miss them. On a lighter note. Rajiv, The wars don't have to happen all at once and even if they did, I don't think it would a population catastrophe per se. It would be yet another example heaped on the huge disgusting pile of human avarice and wanton desire that is a large part of human history.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Population control called key to deal

The average woman I know has no desire to have 8 children. I certainly don't feel like getting pregnant again. Give women the freedom to have less children and you'll see less people being born.

Keep women barefoot and pregnant, and then they won't make trouble for you, like divorcing you. Feminism has not only destroyed the institution of marriage, it has destroyed the happiness of men, women, children, and the entire society.

Maybe there are ways beside war, famine, and feminism to control population growth, but what are they?

[Chris]

Re: Population control called key to deal

i'm with Steve on this one. Though maybe with a little less conviction

[Kadriana]

Re: Population control called key to deal

Keep women barefoot and pregnant, and then they won't make trouble for you, like divorcing you. Feminism has not only destroyed the institution of marriage, it has destroyed the happiness of men, women, children, and the entire society.

Maybe there are ways beside war, famine, and feminism to control population growth, but what are they?

I'm glad my husband doesn't share your views. I'm too cheap to ever divorce him.

I think birth control methods being more widely available would be a start. Even if you practiced natural methods, that would help but since women are property in a lot of parts of the world, men would have to choose to follow such methods. That of course wouldn't solve everything since some people have large families to help on farms and many religions encourage large families but it could at least help.

ETA: I think there are a lot of people who are having 8 kids that don't necessarily want 8 children. I think helping those people have fewer would be a good place to start.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Population control called key to deal

i'm with Steve on this one. Though maybe with a little less conviction

so am I for the most part. I also agree in general with abexman

[Jay]

Re: Population control called key to deal

How much will grandma fetch at the glue factory?