Spectrum_Prez said:
Personally, I don't understand people who want a lot of kids. It's just kinda creepy.
I don't think I could manage any more than two, seeing as my parents are having such a hard time just managing me (financially, mostly).
There's also a moral side to it too. Since we know that the world is going to be way overpopulated in a few decades, it seems we have an obligation to not have too many kids. What's the figure being thrown around? 9 Billion by 2050?
I'm a big fan of adoption for people who want large families, at least it's not putting anything extra into the population.
What do you guys think?
Bonus: what do you want to call your kids?
In fact most couples must have MORE than 2 children for a stable population to correct for how not everyone of their offspring will necessarily have a child. So for every two couples that have 2 kids, one couple should have 3.
2 children per couple only gives a stable population if NO ONE EVER DIES before they reach adulthood and EVERYONE succeeds in having 2 children when that is not how the real world works. Shit happens, people die or get infertile, or wait too long to start having children or they end up in a state that finding a partner is very unlikely.
in fact, there is the theory that it is BAD to have a stable population due to how old people are a far greater burden on society/economy than children, populations need to have a small low level of continuous growth to mitigate the effects of an ageing population.
And yes, our population will keep growing and we will find a way to deal with the increasing burden. Even if it means colonising other planets in the solar system if it REALLY goes that far, of course that is the extreme long term.
the thing is, overpopulation may be the lesser evil compared to population shrinkage, imagine if in a single generation hardly any babies are born, call it a "baby bust" that can have DEVASTATING effects on world economies ans this generation ages, what happens as the previous much larger generation gets old and no longer contribute to the economy yet still need the economy to cater for them? What happens when people are promoted through their jobs only there just aren't enough young people to take over the lower positions.
Just look to china to see some of the problems that can be borne out of trying to reduce population. it is VERY dangerous to try to reduce population faster than it grew to that point.
Many of the job crisis around the world in the 1970's came from the baby Boom generation, far more young people were getting old enough to enter the work force yet the number of jobs had not increased and took years to adapt.
