• Human population control - Should this practice be enforced?
    164 replies, posted
Uhm, what are you implying? That we should deceive the general puplic by telling them that over-population is going to cause us to run out of resources? I dunno, first of all I think the truth is best in all cases. The fact that people are apathetic is a problem, but not one we should solve through deception. People need to know that over-population or not, we're gonna run out of oil. If people don't realize the importance of that in time, then we're fucked. But I trust that people will, even faced with the truth. And when we run out, we'll hopefully have moved on. For energy in general, I'm putting my money on thorium based nuclear power. It seems safe and reliable, so I'm not too worried when it comes to that. I don't think people are truly apathetic. Even if most people are, there will be people who are willing to deal with it. If we look farther into the future, we're going to have to deal with the sun burning out at one point, too, and I'm pretty sure humanity will be trying to come up with solutions long before it actually happens.
[img]http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/094/6/8/combine_logo_for_city18_comic_by_renerdecastro-d3d74w7.png[/img]
There is a shitton of undeveloped land on the planet. The issue isn't population control, it's the distribution of resources.
[QUOTE=Jacknife;36626017][img]http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/094/6/8/combine_logo_for_city18_comic_by_renerdecastro-d3d74w7.png[/img][/QUOTE] Agreed.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36626002]Uhm, what are you implying? That we should deceive the general puplic by telling them that over-population is going to cause us to run out of resources? I dunno, first of all I think the truth is best in all cases. The fact that people are apathetic is a problem, but not one we should solve through deception. People need to know that over-population or not, we're gonna run out of oil. If people don't realize the importance of that in time, then we're fucked. But I trust that people will, even faced with the truth. And when we run out, we'll hopefully have moved on. For energy in general, I'm putting my money on thorium based nuclear power. It seems safe and reliable, so I'm not too worried when it comes to that. I don't think people are truly apathetic. Even if most people are, there will be people who are willing to deal with it. If we look farther into the future, we're going to have to deal with the sun burning out at one point, too, and I'm pretty sure humanity will be trying to come up with solutions long before it actually happens.[/QUOTE] No, I feel like we should be realistic, and yes, truthful too. Let us see that these could each start a future crisis. As we keep that in the back of our mind, we will work towards finding a solution. No solution in history was founded on apathy. Remember the bison, man! If not for us fearing their extinction, they would certainly be all gone now. And in my optimistic heart, I believe everyone wants to do good . . . but not being informed is usually the first cause.
[QUOTE=Jacknife;36626017][img]http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/094/6/8/combine_logo_for_city18_comic_by_renerdecastro-d3d74w7.png[/img][/QUOTE] I for one welcome our new combine fertility destroying overlords.
[QUOTE=Rad McCool;34034144]Us western countries already have very solid birth rates. ' The problem lies within the poor countries, especially Africa, where they breed like there's no tomorrow. [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HFFg0JTGQXw/TZ95KcMMqRI/AAAAAAAAAKU/QQdBDSI3McI/s1600/Total_fertility_rate%2B2009.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] But their mortality rate is low. These people from 3rd world countries die very young. Some don't even get to live past 25 years old.
snip, sorry, my idiot sister found out my password. Deleting post.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;36714416]Even as a Capitalist Republican, I still sometimes believe in population control. Perhaps at the age of eighteen or twenty, a test will be given to see how intelligent you are. Those with slightly below average to genius will be allowed to breed, while the below average and ignorant will not.[/QUOTE] So you shouldn't be able to breed then because you fit in the second category. This actually sounds like a great plan! Just start cutting off your balls now.
snip, sorry, my idiot sister found out my password, deleting post.
According to National Geographic, every human standing shoulder to shoulder would only take up Los Angeles. Unfortunately, I think we are still pretty wasteful, and it's only a matter of time before technology has to come in to reduce our excessiveness. There are plenty of resources here even in oil, but we have to make the best of them. When you accept that the destruction of human lives is okay because it improves the system, it seems to me like you're just giving your approval of the problems in the sysytem. If people are dumb, we should improve education (maybe give more than 4% of taxes to education...?). As for the person who said less space will force us to travel to the stars, I really like that idea. What an ultimate adaption to such an incredible problem.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;36715330]No, I believe what Stalin believed, the feeble minded should not breed, as they insult the generation. I don't fully believe myself, though, it's mostly a thought in the back of my head. And atleast I'm not like the Illuminati, saying that certain races should breed.[/QUOTE] Awesome, then it's clear that you should not breed.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;36715330]I believe what Stalin believed - Illuminati[/QUOTE] Yeah, you don't deserve to breed at all then.
The population will naturally balance itself out, however the damage we do to the world while it stabilizes will be a problem.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;34034577]How do you mean "not working very well"? Their fertility rate is actually below their total fertility rate. And if you look at this graph you'll see that their population is growing slower and slower: [url]http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sp_pop_grow&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=china+population+growth[/url][/QUOTE] well for the longest while they had a population heavily slanted towards the male side because males will inevitably be more successful than females and will be able to care for the parents when they reach the golden years. dunno if it is still like that
All we need is an incurable and highly infectious virus pandemic to wipe out 70% of humanity like the black plague.
We're going to run out of room long before we run out of resources. As the population grows, alternative resources such as wind, water and solar power will become more interesting. So, there's three possible scenarios I foresee happening: One, we realize we're running out of room and we start expanding territory. We will colonize seabeds, cities will be constructed entirely underground. Hell, space flight might even be affordable at this point and people will start to colonize the moon, Mars, or they'll just live in zero-gravity space station cities. Two, people will get exponentially greedier the less room there is. A couple of huge wars will be waged where large portions of the population gets killed in order to make room for the victorious. These wars will probably be non-nuclear, because lets face it, you don't want to turn a piece of land into a nuclear wasteland when you wage war for living space in the first place. Three, some kind of virus from hell (either manmade or not) is unleashed upon mankind and a large part of humanity gets wiped out as a result of it. The world's elite will huddle in bunkers and wait out the apocalypse. Once a vaccine is created, they will come back to the surface to rebuild and repopulate the earth.
[QUOTE=V12US;36749206]We're going to run out of room long before we run out of resources. As the population grows, alternative resources such as wind, water and solar power will become more interesting. So, there's three possible scenarios I foresee happening: One, we realize we're running out of room and we start expanding territory. We will colonize seabeds, cities will be constructed entirely underground. Hell, space flight might even be affordable at this point and people will start to colonize the moon, Mars, or they'll just live in zero-gravity space station cities. Two, people will get exponentially greedier the less room there is. A couple of huge wars will be waged where large portions of the population gets killed in order to make room for the victorious. These wars will probably be non-nuclear, because lets face it, you don't want to turn a piece of land into a nuclear wasteland when you wage war for living space in the first place. Three, some kind of virus from hell (either manmade or not) is unleashed upon mankind and a large part of humanity gets wiped out as a result of it. The world's elite will huddle in bunkers and wait out the apocalypse. Once a vaccine is created, they will come back to the surface to rebuild and repopulate the earth.[/QUOTE] A solution would be to evolve mankind to be able to go to outer space. Build a FTL star ship by the year 2222 AD. Abandon religion as it is a hindrance to human progression. Colonize the moon, build space stations. Move to mars or something
We shouldn't enforce it, because once we get overpopulated, natural selection will do population control FOR us. Let's not sink all our resources into a lost cause.
Im not sure killing humans is morally okay, however birth control, I believe, is. Birth control in the sense that you are only allowed to have a certain number of children.
It should. We need be no more numerous than we are now to evolve as a species and as such it would be a waste of natural resources as well as unnecessary devastation of nature and animal life to go on like this.
Why would we need forced birth control? The world population is already predicted to stop growing by the end of this century. Basically as more and more countries become post-industrial, a main factor being high amounts of education and women's rights, the birthrate of those countries decline rapidly. We have already seen population decline in countries like Japan. Here is a short article on it. [URL]http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/~spgp/2004_03_16/world population growth.pdf[/URL]
we should slaughter all students who get two Fs in a row
[QUOTE=Valnar;36891354]The world population is already predicted to stop growing by the end of this century.[/QUOTE] Wow, I didn't know that. If it is an accurate prediction then I'd say it is great news. I've had nightmares about Earth turning into a chunk of concrete with nothing but blocky structures on it.
If people would adopt more, it would be so much better. In fact, adoption should be required by law. Want to make a family with your woman/partner? Adopt a child. Want to make your OWN kid by natural means? Sure, just adopt a kid first before you do that.
I'm all for population control. I agree that the human population is increasing recklessly. There would be many ways to keep the human population controlled without breaching the human rights. Three children maximum to a family, et cetera. But of course, the fertility rate shouldn't be that low. We don't want to extinct either. [editline]23rd July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Gekkosan;36891591]If people would adopt more, it would be so much better. In fact, adoption should be required by law. Want to make a family with your woman/partner? Adopt a child. Want to make your OWN kid by natural means? Sure, just adopt a kid first before you do that.[/QUOTE] Or don't be a dickhead and leave your kid alone for the others to adopt them in the first place. I can't say the same about dead parents, though.
[QUOTE=sonerin;36895747]I'm all for population control. I agree that the human population is increasing recklessly. There would be many ways to keep the human population controlled without breaching the human rights. Three children maximum to a family, et cetera. But of course, the fertility rate shouldn't be that low. We don't want to extinct either.[/QUOTE] that's implying forcing abortions if a family exceeds that limit. [editline]23rd July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Gekkosan;36891591]If people would adopt more, it would be so much better. In fact, adoption should be required by law. Want to make a family with your woman/partner? Adopt a child. Want to make your OWN kid by natural means? Sure, just adopt a kid first before you do that.[/QUOTE] most adoption agencies carefully screen potential adopters to determine whether they have personalities suitable to be parents. requiring all parents adopt children before having their own kid could just land more adopted kids in abusive families. not only that but that would mean the adoption agency giving most of the kids to parents who have never raised a child before. you can't always plan pregnancy, neither of your plans are accounting for accidental pregnancies.
[QUOTE=Guy Mannly;36895904]that's implying forcing abortions if a family exceeds that limit. [editline]23rd July 2012[/editline] most adoption agencies carefully screen potential adopters to determine whether they have personalities suitable to be parents. requiring all parents adopt children before having their own kid could just land more adopted kids in abusive families. you can't always plan pregnancy, neither of your plans are accounting for accidental pregnancies.[/QUOTE] Pretty much, yeah. But they aren't supposed to give birth more than three times at the first time, so they'd have to face the consequences if they go on further.
[QUOTE=sonerin;36895955]Pretty much, yeah. But they aren't supposed to give birth more than three times at the first time, so they'd have to face the consequences if they go on further.[/QUOTE] forcing abortion would still infringe on their rights.
[QUOTE=Guy Mannly;36895966]forcing abortion would still infringe on their rights.[/QUOTE] Then I guess another system should be brought up. I'm just bringing up the idea of birth control, I guess the government would find a way to solve the 4th birth or more. A large fine, I guess.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.