|
|
Post by Zany on Mar 26, 2024 19:19:32 GMT
I had wanted to discuss this elsewhere but knew it would be impossible.
The easiest way to solve most of the world issues from climate change to starvation would be population control.
Some have proposed government control by financial penalty. But what happened in Bangladesh was bought to my notice by National Geographic a few years ago.
Basically they used a combination of:
Reduction in infant mortality
Free birth control
Education.
What happened was that those who took part found they had all the children they wanted by the age of 26, they didn't want more because they didn't fear losing one.
Then they found they could return to work aged 34 as they didn't have the usual range of ages of children caused by infant mortality.
They could get work because they had basic education.
They didn't get pregnant accidentally because of free contraception.
Finally they got rich, well rich in comparison to those not taking part.
This encouraged others to join the scheme and the result was a reduction from 5.5 children to 2.1 per family.
Could we (The west) roll this out and would it benefit us in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on Mar 26, 2024 19:50:10 GMT
I believe the west already has a declining birth rate. In fact according to Radio 4 today the population of the world has started declining. It's already leading to concerns over the economy. We need rising populations to feed the need for ever increasing 'growth'. At the end of the day, whilst falling populations may help in the long run what we really need is falling consumption. If the population stopped growing today consumption would still rise as poorer countries become more developed. Really, what we need to do is eat the rich.  |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Mar 26, 2024 20:34:55 GMT
I believe the west already has a declining birth rate. In fact according to Radio 4 today the population of the world has started declining. It's already leading to concerns over the economy. We need rising populations to feed the need for ever increasing 'growth'. At the end of the day, whilst falling populations may help in the long run what we really need is falling consumption. If the population stopped growing today consumption would still rise as poorer countries become more developed. Really, what we need to do is eat the rich. Speak for yourself, I'm not fat  |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Mar 26, 2024 20:37:34 GMT
I believe the west already has a declining birth rate. In fact according to Radio 4 today the population of the world has started declining. It's already leading to concerns over the economy. We need rising populations to feed the need for ever increasing 'growth'. At the end of the day, whilst falling populations may help in the long run what we really need is falling consumption. If the population stopped growing today consumption would still rise as poorer countries become more developed. Really, what we need to do is eat the rich. And properly. This will happen whether the population grows or not. Population growth will just exacerbate it. We could eat the rich, slice of Trump anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by totheleft on Mar 26, 2024 20:39:00 GMT
What happened to China effort at Birth control . Awful
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Mar 26, 2024 20:40:51 GMT
What happened to China effort at Birth control . Awful Well it worked, but at a dreadful cost. |
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on Mar 26, 2024 22:16:02 GMT
I believe the west already has a declining birth rate. In fact according to Radio 4 today the population of the world has started declining. It's already leading to concerns over the economy. We need rising populations to feed the need for ever increasing 'growth'. At the end of the day, whilst falling populations may help in the long run what we really need is falling consumption. If the population stopped growing today consumption would still rise as poorer countries become more developed. Really, what we need to do is eat the rich. And properly. This will happen whether the population grows or not. Population growth will just exacerbate it. We could eat the rich, slice of Trump anyone. I'll pass thanks, far too bitter tasting. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2024 0:25:46 GMT
The problems feeding high population increases in poor countries are relatively easy to understand. The near absence of pension provision means that people rely on their children and grandchildren to support them when they are old. And high rates of infant and child mortality means they need to have a lot of kids to increase the chances of enough surviving to do the job.
Of course, whilst the problem is easy to describe, addressing it is much harder to do effectively. Essentially how do poorer counties reliably provide enough of an income for older people for them not to have to rely on their children? And how do we ensure that enough children survive into adulthood in any case? Clearly the money for this can only come from richer countries, but how do politicians sell this need to a public who are themselves struggling?
The problem is easy to recognise and understand, but the solutions are extremely difficult to formulate or sell to electorates.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 3, 2024 7:35:47 GMT
The problems feeding high population increases in poor countries are relatively easy to understand. The near absence of pension provision means that people rely on their children and grandchildren to support them when they are old. And high rates of infant and child mortality means they need to have a lot of kids to increase the chances of enough surviving to do the job. Of course, whilst the problem is easy to describe, addressing it is much harder to do effectively. Essentially how do poorer counties reliably provide enough of an income for older people for them not to have to rely on their children? And how do we ensure that enough children survive into adulthood in any case? Clearly the money for this can only come from richer countries, but how do politicians sell this need to a public who are themselves struggling? The problem is easy to recognise and understand, but the solutions are extremely difficult to formulate or sell to electorates. Yep, this is precisely my point. We in the West worry about the growing global population and its effects on forestry and nature, but we don't want to curb our greed to help stop it. We rely on them being poor to keep our prices low, so we can have more food than we can eat and more luxuries than we possibly need. If you try to talk of these the immediate reaction is that you want us to all live in caves. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Apr 3, 2024 7:47:26 GMT
The problems feeding high population increases in poor countries are relatively easy to understand. The near absence of pension provision means that people rely on their children and grandchildren to support them when they are old. And high rates of infant and child mortality means they need to have a lot of kids to increase the chances of enough surviving to do the job. Of course, whilst the problem is easy to describe, addressing it is much harder to do effectively. Essentially how do poorer counties reliably provide enough of an income for older people for them not to have to rely on their children? And how do we ensure that enough children survive into adulthood in any case? Clearly the money for this can only come from richer countries, but how do politicians sell this need to a public who are themselves struggling? The problem is easy to recognise and understand, but the solutions are extremely difficult to formulate or sell to electorates. Yep, this is precisely my point. We in the West worry about the growing global population and its effects on forestry and nature, but we don't want to curb our greed to help stop it. We rely on them being poor to keep our prices low, so we can have more food than we can eat and more luxuries than we possibly need. If you try to talk of these the immediate reaction is that you want us to all live in caves. Just a thought, but you being typically neo-liberal, with your we can save the world attitude, we just need people to have and need less, who have grown used to needing and having more, which will provoke a reaction of you want us all living in caves. I wonder to myself how much of the credit-based society that has caused the growth and just about every crisis since you have participated in. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 3, 2024 9:36:00 GMT
One way to mitigate population growth would be for the west to stop supporting unfettered population growth in the third world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 3, 2024 19:00:18 GMT
One way to mitigate population growth would be for the west to stop supporting unfettered population growth in the third world. How are they doing that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2024 21:40:18 GMT
Yep, this is precisely my point. We in the West worry about the growing global population and its effects on forestry and nature, but we don't want to curb our greed to help stop it. We rely on them being poor to keep our prices low, so we can have more food than we can eat and more luxuries than we possibly need. If you try to talk of these the immediate reaction is that you want us to all live in caves. Just a thought, but you being typically neo-liberal, with your we can save the world attitude, we just need people to have and need less, who have grown used to needing and having more, which will provoke a reaction of you want us all living in caves. I wonder to myself how much of the credit-based society that has caused the growth and just about every crisis since you have participated in. If you think I am neoliberal you havent been paying attention. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 3, 2024 21:51:45 GMT
Just a thought, but you being typically neo-liberal, with your we can save the world attitude, we just need people to have and need less, who have grown used to needing and having more, which will provoke a reaction of you want us all living in caves. I wonder to myself how much of the credit-based society that has caused the growth and just about every crisis since you have participated in. If you think I am neoliberal you havent been paying attention. The post is directed at me  |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 3, 2024 21:55:52 GMT
Yep, this is precisely my point. We in the West worry about the growing global population and its effects on forestry and nature, but we don't want to curb our greed to help stop it. We rely on them being poor to keep our prices low, so we can have more food than we can eat and more luxuries than we possibly need. If you try to talk of these the immediate reaction is that you want us to all live in caves. Just a thought, but you being typically neo-liberal, with your we can save the world attitude, we just need people to have and need less, who have grown used to needing and having more, which will provoke a reaction of you want us all living in caves. I wonder to myself how much of the credit-based society that has caused the growth and just about every crisis since you have participated in. Short answer loads over the years, But I'm not a fan of "If you can't solve it all on your own then don't comment" I think we can all do something together if we really think cutting population growth is important. |
|
