Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

What would be the best way to unpopulate the earth

Posted Aug 18, '13 at 12:08pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

4,299 posts

Interesting tidbit I learned from my uncle (pertains to the conversation):

In 1935 the average life expectancy was about 62. 1935 was the year social security was passed. The current life expectancy is about 79*. That's a whole 17 year difference. Guess what? I'm 17, so that would be like repeating my entire life over again. A lot of people rely solely on SS, and when it was passed, it was for the lucky few who made it to 65. Now a large majority of people are living past 65, and thus more money is being taken out of SS.

 

Posted Aug 18, '13 at 3:46pm

LazyOne

LazyOne

174 posts

In 1935 the average life expectancy was about 62. 1935 was the year social security was passed. The current life expectancy is about 79*. That's a whole 17 year difference. Guess what? I'm 17, so that would be like repeating my entire life over again. A lot of people rely solely on SS, and when it was passed, it was for the lucky few who made it to 65. Now a large majority of people are living past 65, and thus more money is being taken out of SS.


Yes, indeed, more money is spent on people's health than before, you have that correct. Maybe the US should stop spending 700 billion a year on their military if it worries about tax money so much.

Also, life expectancy depends on where you live.
 

Posted Aug 18, '13 at 10:10pm

Kennethhartanto

Kennethhartanto

248 posts

life expectancy depends on where you live.

i agree with lazyone for this matter. life expectancy is highest in japan ( 81?) and lowest in African country, possibly congo (i forgot the exact number). the fact is that the more richer the country is the higher life expectancy will be. my theory is that if you somehow make all country poor that would unpopulate the world real quick
 

Posted Aug 19, '13 at 1:50am

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,261 posts

Knight

my theory is that if you somehow make all country poor that would unpopulate the world real quick

So what about India?

Usually poor families tend to have more children, while industrialized ones have less. I rather tend to be in favor of raising all countries to a certain standard, which will of course pose the problem of older people, yet there will generally be less people and they will have higher living standards and higher education.
 

Posted Aug 19, '13 at 4:26am

partydevil

partydevil

5,123 posts

Second, believe me, when people are in need for medical help/food/water/shelter, they'll be more than happy to give up their fertility for that.

i suggest you to take a look in some real 3rd world countries...
you have really no idea how it is to live there.
all you know are the desperately organizations begging for your money. the people who actually live there are not desperately begging for anything..

i dont help elders because of there age yes. but you want to 1st make their situation worse and then dont help anyone untill they make their own body disfunction... thats just cruel and plain evil... why dont you just reintroduce slavery while your at it?

First of all I don't see how sterilisation could negatively affect emancipation and sterilisation. I thought anticonception was an accomplishment of emancipation?

you want to force the woman to do something they would not choose for by themself. why dont you just say. all man must cut of their ****...? no instead you want the man to force the woman... sterilisation is 1 of the most radical forms of anticonception. you are really a awful person...
 

Posted Aug 19, '13 at 6:04pm

LazyOne

LazyOne

174 posts

i suggest you to take a look in some real 3rd world countries...
you have really no idea how it is to live there.
all you know are the desperately organizations begging for your money. the people who actually live there are not desperately begging for anything..

So you're saying a starving mother would not accept sterilisation in exchange for a future for herself and her child?

i dont help elders because of there age yes. but you want to 1st make their situation worse and then dont help anyone untill they make their own body disfunction... thats just cruel and plain evil... why dont you just reintroduce slavery while your at it?

Straw man argument. You are misrepresenting what I said.
What I said: "I think we should raise retirement age so that elders can enjoy their retirement without the young workforce paying for it."
Your interpretation:"omg why don u reintroduce slavery omg ur evil lol u wanna let all elderly people die omg"
No. The "Let all elderly people die" was your plan, not mine. Please learn how to read.
you want to force the woman to do something they would not choose for by themself.

I'm not forcing anyone. I'm giving them the choice. Please learn how to read.
why dont you just say. all man must cut of their ****...? no instead you want the man to force the woman...

Because, my friend, severing someone's genital area prohibits them from enjoying sex.
sterilisation is 1 of the most radical forms of anticonception. you are really a awful person...

Radical? Do you know what you're talking about, my friend? Sterilisation is the most efficient way of preventing a pregnancy. Also, why are you calling me an awful person? I'm talking about offering someone a chance, they can denyit. You're talking about letting all of the elders suffer until they either commit suicide because nobody is helping them or until they die of a natural cause.

If the quality of your arguments isn't going to go up, I will ignore your posts and put you on my mute list (if such a thing exists on AG). I refuse to discuss serious matters with someone who likes to use straw man arguments and add in an ad hominem every now and then as well.
 

Posted Aug 20, '13 at 8:08am

partydevil

partydevil

5,123 posts

So you're saying a starving mother would not accept sterilisation in exchange for a future for herself and her child?

make a trip to africa befor you keep this going... ive been there more then once. and people there do not have it as bad as the organizations who try to help them make it look like for you. they show you only the desperate people and already helpless people so that you will give money more easily.
like porn is not reality, those "help or else" video's are not reality either.

Straw man argument. You are misrepresenting what I said.

hmmm, thats what you are doing aswell.... so i'm free to do so.

i refuses to stay into this with such a hatefull mind. have fun.
 

Posted Aug 21, '13 at 3:58am

eunoic

eunoic

51 posts

Put birth control into women's daily vitamins or something equally as sneaky.

 

Posted Aug 24, '13 at 6:17pm

MagicTree

MagicTree

773 posts

Create a massive building and call it TrollCon. When all the trolls come, they will fall into a massive hole full of cacti to slowly prickle them to death. Simple:
Less People and Less Trolls.

It's the ultimate trolling.

 

Posted Aug 24, '13 at 8:07pm

Kasic

Kasic

5,734 posts

Alright, I think it's time I gave everyone the answer so this thread of random nonsense suggestions can be put to rest.

Education, plain and simple. The number one predictor of how many children a woman will have in her lifetime is highly, strongly correlated to her level of education. Combine this with availability and use of birth control, while removing religion (which encourages high baby count so they have more defenseless things to indoctrinate and thus try and rule the world through oppressive morals and sheer screaming volume).

There are three stages to a nation's growth rate. Undeveloped countries have high birth rates, but high death rates as well. Then they begin to develop and get better societal systems, improved healthcare, and general education, meaning less people are now dying but women are still having 4-5 babies on average. Thus the population skyrockets (India/China) until beginning to stabilize.

The only humane way to reduce the population on earth is through education and mutual understanding that we cannot support infinite growth. There are some people on this thread who continually assert that economics fall apart at birth rates less than 2.1, but that completely ignores the issue that we have a finite amount of resources. Only once people realize that we're in deep **** will efforts be made to reduce the population, at which point the ideal method will have already been passed up because we keep digging ourselves deeper. That'll happen in about two hundred years I'd imagine, after our current population is 8x its current amount...

So there. Can we stop with the dumb suggestions now?

 
Reply to What would be the best way to unpopulate the earth

You must be logged in to post a reply!