+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Social (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: The Speakeasy (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=54)
+--- Thread: Population Control (/showthread.php?tid=38398)
Pages:
1
2
Population Control - OB3LISK - 2011-02-25
Abortion is legal in USA too. It's just so controversial.
Population Control - kanevaldier - 2011-02-25
I have seen many things posted here about "education/schooling", issues like global warming and such. The fact is that the current system that is in place can support a world population of around 9 billion people. Currently the world population is around 7 billion. Schooling/education does not stop people from having children. Choices do that. Global warming is a complete farse bottom line. As for food production, that can be increased with little to no problem. Lets look at a piece of history for a second. Egypt, durring the days of the Roman empire was a massive food creation source. Egypt produced enough food in that time to feed the entire roman empire. Now, Egypt is very different. They shifted the prioities and all but eliminated food production. Its things like this that can be fixed. Each nation does have the ability to be selfsuficent. Just most of them wont do it.
Bottom line is that no matter what, in the end it always comes down to money and power. Those who have the money and power dont care about the ones beneith them. It is the sad truth in this world.
Population Control - Tay - 2011-02-25
I think it's going to be inevitable, people are living longer and making babies all the time.
However, who do you cut out of the picture first?
Population Control - IllegallySane - 2011-02-25
At the rate the numbers are growing, nothing short of a massive world war/genocide would lower the population, and that is clearly not the answer. IIRC poorer parts of the world actually have more children because they are afraid not all of them will be successful, so more children = higher chance of successful offspring, meaning their legacy/family line will continue on. I think if we can raise the general wealth level of the poorer countries they will have a normal number of children, not this 5-8 children nonsense. Exceptions would be those who give birth to an absurd amount of children at once (read: triplets and the like). I've always heard and read of poor families giving birth to tons of children. I wonder why?
Population Control - Fiel - 2011-02-26
Because simply "Making a country wealthier" is short, simplistic, and doesn't actually solve anything.
To give a person a fighting chance in a culture ravaged by warlords and famine you have to give a person much more than material wealth. You need to give them food, shelter, clothing, and education. And it's very difficult to give them these things when its in a warlord's position to make sure that these people do not ever get them.
Also, it takes several generations to make a marked improvement in the wealth of a country. In these days in Africa, children are born to malnourished mothers and the children live malnourished. This makes them have irreversible damage when it comes to cognitive function and physical strength regardless of how much you feed them. The actual cost to give these people some amount of fighting power in their communities is astronomical when you think about everything you have to give them over a period of years and years. And that's assuming that the warlords or oppressive regimes will let you do it.
So, good luck giving people in Africa your money. Simply giving them money won't do anything. And that's a damn shame.