A Global One Child Policy?

[petros]

Should there be a Chinese style one child policy?

Is there too many people on the planet stressing the environment, energy, water, air and food supplies?

Yay or nay and why ?

 

[SLM]

No. I feel sorry for all the folks who never had siblings in a way. Who did they blame things on when Mom & Dad got angry?

Would it be a 'suggestion' or a more rigid requirement? How does that get enforced anyway? What about childless couples? Can they sell their quota? Bad idea all around to allow a government, any government, that much control over personal choices.

 

[skookumchuck]

I can help, someone may have my allotment, i will even build it for them;-)

Oops....too late;-)

 

[SLM]

I can help, someone may have my allotment, i will even build it for them;-)

We already have those. It's called the sperm bank, lol.

 

[skookumchuck]

We already have those. It's called the sperm bank, lol.

Oh darn, and here i thought i had an original thought:lol:

 

[petros]

At least you are one of the few who do think.

 

[WLDB]

There are too many people on earth but the problem isnt really here. If not for immigration our population would be in decline. Various forms of birth control seem to be working fine here.

Most of the population growth is in developing countries where governments wouldnt be able to enforce something like this. Which is a good thing, its a bit too much power. Easy access to birth control and better sex-ed would work wonders.

With or without such a policy nature tends to have ways of fixing over-population problems for all species.

 

[PoliticalNick]

There are more than enough resources on this planet to support double the population we have now. All we need to do is share them instead of sell them. We have the technology to grow enough food, get enough pure water, and heat & power the planet for many generations if not in perpetuity. The problem is we allow that technology to be claimed as owned by someone or some corporation instead of making it freely available for the good of all humans.

 

[WLDB]

There are more than enough resources on this planet to support double the population we have now. All we need to do is share them instead of sell them. We have the technology to grow enough food, get enough pure water, and heat & power the planet for many generations if not in perpetuity. The problem is we allow that technology to be claimed as owned by someone or some corporation instead of making it freely available for the good of all humans.

Human nature prevents such a utopia from happening.

Communism is so 20th century.

 

[petros]

There are too many people on earth....

What makes you say that?

 

[WLDB]

What makes you say that?

Well over a billion people are living in absolute poverty. While in some places the percentage of the population in poverty is decreasing the actual numbers of people in poverty is increasing.

In theory the earth could handle more, but given how we (as a species) waste various reasources I don't see that happening anytime soon, if at all.

 

[TenPenny]

What sort of a one-child policy do you mean? One where farmers are allowed to have more than one kid, and rich people can simply pay fines to avoid the penalties, and girls aren't wanted so they are killed or abandoned? Is that what you're asking about?

 

[petros]

Well over a billion people are living in absolute poverty. While in some places the percentage of the population in poverty is decreasing the actual numbers of people in poverty is increasing.

In theory the earth could handle more, but given how we (as a species) waste various reasources I don't see that happening anytime soon, if at all.

Why are they living in poverty? Does it have anything to do with the ability of the planet to support life or is it political?

What sort of a one-child policy do you mean? One where farmers are allowed to have more than one kid, and rich people can simply pay fines to avoid the penalties, and girls aren't wanted so they are killed or abandoned? Is that what you're asking about?

That would be Chinese style wouldn't it?

 

[TenPenny]

That would be Chinese style wouldn't it?

Yup, that's it.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Well over a billion people are living in absolute poverty. While in some places the percentage of the population in poverty is decreasing the actual numbers of people in poverty is increasing.

In theory the earth could handle more, but given how we (as a species) waste various reasources I don't see that happening anytime soon, if at all.

Although there is validity to the theory of wasting resources the bigger factor is that we allow the resources to be claimed by corporations and sold for profit which leads to countries and entire regions not being able to get them. It is quite clear that the profit motive is what causes the largest issues.

 

[TenPenny]

Although there is validity to the theory of wasting resources the bigger factor is that we allow the resources to be claimed by corporations and sold for profit which leads to countries and entire regions not being able to get them. It is quite clear that the profit motive is what causes the largest issues.

I take it that you don't work for a living.

 

[PoliticalNick]

I take it that you don't work for a living.

What would make you say that? Is it hard for you to understand someone who works to support themselves also believes in putting humans ahead of corporate profit.

FYI: I drive a semi in the western triangle and regularly work 26 days a month 10+ hours a day.

 

[TenPenny]

What would make you say that?

Because you don't believe in 'the profit motive', so you obviously don't work for a living.

If you work for a living, you believe in getting paid for your labour, so you believe in the profit motive.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Because you don't believe in 'the profit motive', so you obviously don't work for a living.

If you work for a living, you believe in getting paid for your labour, so you believe in the profit motive.

Your logic is a little warped there. I work hard and make good money and I share lots of it with those less fortunate. I believe in fair wages for your labour which is far different from the corporate profit motive.

The issue I have is that corporations are bound by their charter to make as much profit as they can without concern for the human race. If a corporation was an individual we would call them greedy, cheapskate, uncaring etc and they would be despised by their neighbors but because it is a corporation their actions are deemed ok.

 

[TenPenny]

Your logic is a little warped there. I work hard and make good money and I share lots of it with those less fortunate. I believe in fair wages for your labour which is far different from the corporate profit motive.

So, it's okay for you to profit from your driving, but it's not okay for a business to profit from doing business.

Profit is only a dirty word when it's not you doing the profiting - do you encourage your employer to only break even on all jobs? Do you ensure that you reduce your wages so the evil corporation that employs you doesn't turn a profit?

The issue I have is that corporations are bound by their charter to make as much profit as they can without concern for the human race. If a corporation was an individual we would call them greedy, cheapskate, uncaring etc and they would be despised by their neighbors but because it is a corporation their actions are deemed ok.

You obviously know nothing about corporate charters, and even less about how corporations operate.