Population control

[Oniya]

Personally, I think the idea of giving someone 'control' over population growth is a bad idea.  That kind of power would be abused or misused, even if the intentions are good.  Looking at what Hans Rosling said, China's 'one child' policy might have had the opposite intended effect.  Families with lots of children were penalized severely, which led to worse economic conditions for those families.  As there is a trend between a strong economy and lower population growth, you actually want those families to be as financially successful as possible so they have access to better economic conditions. 

The other thing that China's 'one child' policy has done is severely unbalance the gender distribution over there.  In China, there is a strong desire to have sons to carry on the family line, and when restricted to one child, the number of female infanticides skyrocketed so that families could try for that precious male heir.  This is starting to be felt as those children reach puberty with a shortage of potential marriage prospects.

[Callie Del Noire]

Personally, I think the idea of giving someone 'control' over population growth is a bad idea.  That kind of power would be abused or misused, even if the intentions are good.  Looking at what Hans Rosling said, China's 'one child' policy might have had the opposite intended effect.  Families with lots of children were penalized severely, which led to worse economic conditions for those families.  As there is a trend between a strong economy and lower population growth, you actually want those families to be as financially successful as possible so they have access to better economic conditions. 

Thats my 2 cents.

You left out the biggest issues with China's 1 child program.. the growing Gender disparity. In some sections of China it's going to get really nasty. 5:1 or higher.  As one of my co-workers said when we first saw a news article about it, "In 20 years.. there won't be an ugly women in China."

[RubySlippers]

I suspect China will ease immigration of educated foreign women with useful skills if they marry a Chinese national to be required to get wives for these men, but its not unsurmountable to fill the need. Save most men to attract wives would need the kind of jobs that count.

[CmdrRenegade]

Couple of disclaimers.  I'm not suggesting anything that could look in anything like selected genocide.  Instead of removing people, I was speculating on if we should just add less.  The thing is, that it's not just about resources.  It's also about jobs.  Like it or not, globalization is a reality.  More and more jobs of all stripes are moving overseas to countries with fewer worker protections, state welfare programs, environmental restrictions etc., and also have a massive population.  I'm thinking less on a world scale and more on a national scale within each First World country.  A thought many others and myself had had is this: "Why should I train so hard and pay so much money to learn how to do a job when there's a Chinese, Indian, or Mexican, who'll do the same job for a fraction of the cost?" Some food for thought.

[BCdan]

The other thing that China's 'one child' policy has done is severely unbalance the gender distribution over there.  In China, there is a strong desire to have sons to carry on the family line, and when restricted to one child, the number of female infanticides skyrocketed so that families could try for that precious male heir.  This is starting to be felt as those children reach puberty with a shortage of potential marriage prospects.

You left out the biggest issues with China's 1 child program.. the growing Gender disparity. In some sections of China it's going to get really nasty. 5:1 or higher.  As one of my co-workers said when we first saw a news article about it, "In 20 years.. there won't be an ugly women in China."

Yes, that is another huge issue.  Infanticide targeted towards girls is just another unforeseen consequence of a central planning approach to population control.  I am trying to find a source, but I remember hearing that initially families in China were encouraged to have more children as a greater population was considered tied to economic growth, when really that's not necessarily true. 

Couple of disclaimers.  I'm not suggesting anything that could look in anything like selected genocide.  Instead of removing people, I was speculating on if we should just add less.  The thing is, that it's not just about resources.  It's also about jobs.  Like it or not, globalization is a reality.  More and more jobs of all stripes are moving overseas to countries with fewer worker protections, state welfare programs, environmental restrictions etc., and also have a massive population.  I'm thinking less on a world scale and more on a national scale within each First World country.  A thought many others and myself had had is this: "Why should I train so hard and pay so much money to learn how to do a job when there's a Chinese, Indian, or Mexican, who'll do the same job for a fraction of the cost?" Some food for thought.

Right now those countries where jobs are moving are experiencing their equivalent of the industrial revolution, except its going to take them significantly less time to catch up with the 1st world countries because countries like the US have already done the necessary technological research.    And as I said, be wary of the unforeseen consequences of going against natural economic growth. 

[Valencia]

Again, I really think that we should get over acting as independent nations. Mind you, I'm definitely not down for a OWO scenario. I just feel that we should start behaving like a species, because we're all human. No matter where we are from, and we all have the same needs. Culture is a great way to celebrate our diversity, but we really need to stand in solidarity for each other, with each other.

The technology that we possess ought to be applied for the entire planet, for people everywhere. But since we're so focused on 'taking care of our own', we're loosing alot of compassion I think. And the disinformation about fresh water shortages, lack of food and so on isn't the reality. We have the technology to step up to these issues, there's just a whole crap ton of bureaucracy in the way.

But I agree on legalizing voluntary euthanasia. I do nursing home visits with my TDI mastiff, and I really wish that some people would just be kind and allow these people to let themselves go. The fact that it's a crime to take your own life speaks of our society in a bad way.

[Zakharra]

 It's a nice thought, but unfortunately, I don't think there is a single species that works together as a while. Until  a world superstate is able to take over the world and enforce it's wll by military force, it's nothing but a dream. There's far far too many sub-groups that exist among humanity for there to be any real species cooperation.

[Malefique]

Actually the idea that Chinese families have been killing girl children is a bit of a misunderstanding; they used to, girl children often got 'scorpion in the cot' syndrome, but under China's control rules you only got one shot even if your child died.  If you had another after the death of your first, you still got penalised for having more than one child.  The real issue has been abortion of female foetuses,  since that didn't count.  The outlook isn't quite as bad as it seems, either.  Chinese men are looking to obtain brides in other countries, and there's been an upsurge in marriages between Chinese nationals and girls of Chinese origin in places like Britain and the US, and with non-chinese girls in countries like South Korea - which could actually have a positive impact on the population and economies of those countries.  Plus it may well lead to an improvement in life for Chinese gays, since the competition for brides will make it worth while for the state to encourage male-male couples.  Not so good for female-female couples, though, and there is the problem with kidnapping brides.