How to save the planet: have fewer children?

[YukoValis]

let's put it simply in a language all can understand. The planet can and will outlive us. We think we are doing damage because all we care about is our habitat. True that might be getting destroyed but the planet doesn't give a damn. It will continue to be here longer then us, even if we blow it up we will only kill ourselves and put it into chunks. To quote a very wise man "The planet is fine, it's the people who are F***ed"

(I would like to avoid certain hammers on that last one please)

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

The west's population is actually ageing, so if anything, I would recommend we make more babies.

Then again, the whole overpopulation thing is bullshit. The planet's population will stabilize by the year 2100.

 

[G1eet]

Save the planet by reading State of Fear and shutting the fuck up about global warming.

On the other hand, I do believe in resource conservation, but not to the extent to forcing birth caps. Just invest in extraterrestrial colonies; god knows the extra resources that we could get from Mars would help.

Actually this is a really good point. If we started doing terraphorming on mars we could be growing food there in a few centuries, and getting mineral resources as soon as we were able to send manned missions.

Thank Kim Stanley Robinson for implanting the idea in my head.

And I'm not surprised someone agrees, if your choice of username was any indicator

 

[Azraellod]

i fail to see anything barbaric about having fewer children.

i think human population is way to high already... i don't plan on contributing to it.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

The west's population is actually ageing, so if anything, I would recommend we make more babies.

Then again, the whole overpopulation thing is bullshit. The planet's population will stabilize by the year 2100.

Most likely by means of another war, but I'm fine with that.

 

[Go Fighting In The War Room]

Well I hope this is politically correct but, how about the first world, with a decreaseing population, has more children, and the larger second world nations, (Indonesia, India, Vietnam, Nigeria) follow China's plan of having one child and get government benifets and taking them away if they have more?

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Well I hope this is politically correct but, how about the first world, with a decreaseing population, has more children, and the larger second world nations, (Indonesia, India, Vietnam, Nigeria) follow China's plan of having one child and get government benifets and taking them away if they have more?

China doesn't take away your children if you have more then one. You get a fine, and a not to costly one at that. Many richer Chinese couples break the rule many times. Also, the "One Child" law only applies to Chinese people of Han ethnicity that live in densely populated cities.

 

[Ironic]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090803/sc_livescience/savetheplanethavefewerkids

I had just heard this on CNN recently. Personally, I think its barbaric and there are more efficient, if not less ugly, ways to get the same results; but I'm just one person. What are your thoughts?

I don't remember it ever being barbaric to have LESS kids. Think of it this way, we have less resources than we need and for one generation, to stop having kids, halves the next generation.

We do need some sort of population control, because we survive a lot more, and longer than we used to, and that survival rate will only climb, and so thus will the population.

 

[Go Fighting In The War Room]

Well I hope this is politically correct but, how about the first world, with a decreaseing population, has more children, and the larger second world nations, (Indonesia, India, Vietnam, Nigeria) follow China's plan of having one child and get government benifets and taking them away if they have more?

China doesn't take away your children if you have more then one. You get a fine, and a not to costly one at that. Many richer Chinese couples break the rule many times. Also, the "One Child" law only applies to Chinese people of Han ethnicity that live in densely populated cities.

No I didn't mean they take away your children. I meant they take away your government benifets.

Sorry about the confusion...

 

[Cama Zots]

I completely agree with what people are saying here. There needs to be a child cap. One per couple. And it needs to be strictly enforced, at least for 10 years or so. In Larry Niven's Ringworld, people were implanted with a small device that releases chemicals that make it impossible to reproduce. When a couple wants to have a SINGLE child, they could have the device removed. It works, and it's fair. If people weren't having enough children then regulations could permit more pregnancies.

We could have programs like this, make them voluntary at first. Then once people warm up to the idea, require it.

The birth rate has always been significantly lower for wealthier countries than it has been for second and third world countries. Plus, China tried this once.

I guess they just weren't trying hard enough. Besides, you could have as many kids as you want, but you only receive benefits for your first, under the Chinese system.

Going to other planets won't solve the problem. We simply do not (and will not) have the technology to travel safely to other worlds (at least for a few hundred years). Space Travel is notorious for running into fatal screw ups. Is packing tens of millions of people into tin cans (a project that would probably end up bankrupting every nation on Earth) and sending them off in ships that are extremely likely to fall apart long before they ever reach their destination really the best idea? If we had a way of traveling instantly from the surface of the Earth to an alien plant far away from here, sure go for it. Right now though, we don't have the science nor the technology nor even the funding to do it, and do it safely.

Right now, we need real world solutions.

 

[Sparrow]

Barbaric? No. Strange? A little.

Still, nobody is forcing anyone to do this. When it becomes a law, you can be scared.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Wait.. it only applies to a single ethnicity? Uh.. okay..

Yes, the Han are the majority ethnic group in China, so it kinda makes sense.

 

[metagaia]

don't make fewer children,just kill more

can't we do both and meet in the middle?
Surely that would be more efficient.

I like it, a 'one-in-one-out' policy.

Seriously though, there is nothing wrong with this, and you can't really call the one child policy a failure, since it did decrease birth rates in China, and they would be having worse problems if they hadn't of implemented it at all.

The world is just too crowded for 7+ billion people, and short of terraforming other planets, or (even more unlikely) the world getting it's act together and stop wasting resources; this seems to be the most viable and humane solution.

 

[Nerdfury]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090803/sc_livescience/savetheplanethavefewerkids

I had just heard this on CNN recently. Personally, I think its barbaric and there are more efficient, if not less ugly, ways to get the same results; but I'm just one person. What are your thoughts?

Barbaric? There's a lot of things I could say to you right now that would be very mean and likely get me permabanned. How is having less children fucking barbaric?

If people had to go through the same effort and cost of having their own kids as parents do who adopt in civilised countries, there would be less kids, less bad parents and a much better world.

 

[Cama Zots]

How is having less kids Barbaric?

If anything, it means that the resources you would normally be devoting to 3 or 4 gets channelled to one. Billy, Cindy, Jenny, and Larry can't afford to all go to private schools and their parents can't afford college tuition for all of them, but Bob's can.

 

[Shoqiyqa]

We should have instituted "one child per adult" ten years ago.

Then there'd be real trouble when a couple with one child split up and each of them wants to be able to have children with another partner some day ...

They're all going to run out of places to live ... and run out of rainforest ... and run out of crude oil ... and run out of fish ...

Oh, wait. We're already running out of fish, aren't we? Also whales, some species of dolphin, sharks, healthy coral reef, gorillas, places to live, rainforest, .....

 

[Fulax]

Voluntarily having less children is not barbaric. This is barbaric:

I completely agree with what people are saying here. There needs to be a child cap. One per couple. And it needs to be strictly enforced, at least for 10 years or so. In Larry Niven's Ringworld, people were implanted with a small device that releases chemicals that make it impossible to reproduce. When a couple wants to have a SINGLE child, they could have the device removed. It works, and it's fair. If people weren't having enough children then regulations could permit more pregnancies.

We could have programs like this, make them voluntary at first. Then once people warm up to the idea, require it.

I'm actually stunned.

 

[internutt]

In poor countries families have lots of Children in order to help keep the family alive. More family members (that survive the harsh environment) means more hands that are able to work and provide for the family.

In the West we have a choice of how many children we can have. Like any choice it shouldn't be abused. For example you shouldn't have 10 kids if you can not afford to feed them or have the living space to place them all in.

We can sustain our populations the way they are no doubt. However, some Countries are already seeing the effects of a decrease in children. This is bad as it means fewer working adults are sending MORE of their tax money to help the increased elderly population, less schools needed thus adults are out of work meaning less people to provide for the elderly.

An upside down pyramid, fewer kids and a larger increase in the older population due to good health care. For a society to survive we need as many children being born into this world as there are people leaving this world.

*This is my Standard Grade Geography knowledge going here. Hopefully I've remembered it all correctly.