So. How do you guys feel about population control? Is it ethical? Is it logical? Is it necessary? What kind of population control do you think would work best, if any at all? Can I haz cookie?
Well if the chinease and koreans could stop makeing so much population earth would be cleaner.
It isn't just the Chinese and Koreans that you should blame for having a ton of kids. In China there is a law on how many kids you are allowed to have, so it isn't like there aren't steps in place.
America is one of the fastest growing countries in the world, last I checked, and it seems to me that we aren't really doing anything about that. Also India, most European countries and parts of Africa have way to many kids every year, so don't try to pin it on China and Korea.
If it's something like people aren't allowed to have more than a few kids in a certain period of time due to overpopulation, then it's almost needed. However, if it's like "...All [insert minority here] people can not have children and if they do, their child will be burned at the stake...and then slowly roasted in an orange glaze" that's wrong...in more ways than one.
Here's my own rather heartless view on the subject: I feel that, if you're not contributing to society in a at least semi-direct way, if you are, in fact, a useless drainage of resources, then I feel that you should be 'gotten rid of'. I would believe this even if the population was perfectly stable. And I also feel there should be a limit on how many children you are allowed to have.
Here's my own rather heartless view on the subject: I feel that, if you're not contributing to society in a at least semi-direct way, if you are, in fact, a useless drainage of resources, then I feel that you should be 'gotten rid of'.
I personally believe population control is extremely necessary, we are already starting to see the effects of the burgeoning population on the earth, and it will only get exponentially larger from here. Killing people that are currently alive is unethical and would never be popular enough for politicians to get away with passing it. I think where they should start is limiting children. I think you should have to fill out an application and see a shrink before you are allowed to conceive, simply put, lets clean up the gene pool!
we are already starting to see the effects of the burgeoning population on the earth
Not really, what we're seeing is poor logistics, awful infrastructure in third world countries, and the greed of some countries and individuals. There is enough food, water, and land, for the population and will be for quite some time without any technological advances.
I think you should have to fill out an application and see a shrink before you are allowed to conceive, simply put, lets clean up the gene pool!
So, make an elitist society? Sounds fantastic sarcasm/
What gives anyone the right to kill someone or say you can't have anymore kids?
Necessity. If humans are dying out due to an over populated planet, which granted, isn't happening just yet, then yes we should have the authority to say that you can't have any more kids. Or to say that you have to go because you are too old and can no longer help society, rather you have become a burdon.
Call it Elitist thinking if you will *cough* samy *cough*, but the fact remains that if you just use up resources and don't contribute a thing, then you should go.
As everyone else seems to have said, I agree that it is o.k. to limit the amount of children one can hame; Maybe between 3-5 kids at max. However, killing people is not a great idea. Several have suggested killing the elderly. I feel that this may lead to killing people as soon as they retire, because that would be the point they "stop benefiting society". However, I'm undecided about killing of people under a certain IQ...
Not really, what we're seeing is poor logistics, awful infrastructure in third world countries, and the greed of some countries and individuals. There is enough food, water, and land, for the population and will be for quite some time without any technological advances.
How long is quite some time? Everyone puts these problems out of their generation. It is easy to say that we may never see widespread famine in our lifetime, but with population growth such as has been recorded in the past 70 years, we will approach 10 billion people in less than 30 years. We are quickly draining down the oil supply, and we are already utilizing approximately 50% of our arable land, why bother waiting until it is all used up to scramble for a solution?
Call it Elitist thinking if you will *cough* samy *cough*, but the fact remains that if you just use up resources and don't contribute a thing, then you should go.
I said selective genetic breeding would lead to an elitist society, which it would.
We are quickly draining down the oil supply
There a plenty of viable alternatives emerging as I type this, running out of fossil fuels is one of the least of my worries.
we are already utilizing approximately 50% of our arable land
So we utilize it better, genetically modified crops are a fix that comes to mind. Also, again, indoor farming is quickly becoming a fantastic option.
why bother waiting until it is all used up to scramble for a solution?
I never said that, simply that acting like it's a huge problem now wont solve anything, should we be working towards fixes? Of course, but it wont be a major issue for years to come and by that time we'll probably have killed enough of each other that we wont have to worry about it.
Alright, I have given you people enough time to realize the true problem with getting rid of old people, so I will tell you.
The number one problem with getting rid of all the old people is the economic problems from loss of jobs.
A lot of medical attention and care is given to the elderly every year. There are also homes where the elderly are taken care of. The Hospitals and Nursing homes would not have nearly the same amout of money flow if they had no old people, obviously. So if all the old people were gone, there would be a lot more young people not contributing to society than there are all ready. The old people with health problems and the ones in Nursing homes give their monthy check directly back into society every time they get it, because they have to. They can't save the cash if they have a debilitating disease, or if they are in a home.
I am supprised none of you thought of this already.
It depends on context. Animals out of control To a point, population control is sometimes nescessary. People Mother nature does human kinds population control for use. See Haiti.
Population control is a touchy point. Some may find it necessary, while others find it outrageous. The fact of the matter is that we need to control our population, but how?
My answer to that is simple, limitations. America and its immigration laws are pretty vague. You can come to America, take a test, and (if passed) can be a citizen. If America were to tighten up those laws, or even completely cut immigration out of America, then that would reduce the population over time.
Another issue would be able the illegal immigrants in America. The way the governments counts the population is by census. This census counts EVERYBODY. So the government might say our population is 1,000,000 people, but subtract the illegals, and its maybe around 600,000.
In conclusion, the only main things we have to do in order to limit the population, is tighten immigration laws.
