StarGateWars Forums

To be a good citizen, I would suggest highly all of you, myself included (of course), to have not more than one or two children. If you already have more, please, for Earth's and its future sake, don't try to get more of them! You probably all know the humorous cat image "kitty has reached critical mass!", well, here, it's Earth who is reaching it. That is far worse than a single kitty's critical mass reaching!
Yes I know that religion tells to do children to develop societies and prosper, but this stage is reached already by far, and even, the red line has been crossed for some decades (otherwise, I wouldn't have made this topic..). Now, we are looking more quantity than quality, and it's a problem (we will be about 9 BILLION by 2050!!). Yes, I'm aware that those doing the rabbits way are more likely in developping countries (Middle East included, emirates rich or not doesn't matter) for various reasons, but still, better try to act the right way, it would be already that.
You know that in the long term, I am right.
And the policy of "others will do it for me" isn't a good one, because, don't forget, others are very likely to think the same...therefore, nothing would change..
China (yes I know, a communist dictatorship..) is doing that, and it's been helpful so far I think, to slow down their growth, compared to India for example.

i guess moder kind of "flue" will fix it, the 3 first kinds we saw this 4 last years are just tests

I am much more in favour of avoiding/preventing creation of new lives than getting rid of the existing ones (excepted the serial killers and co of course)...

Ridiculous.

Universe wrote:Ridiculous.

Very easy to "criticize" other's proposals, however, harder one, what better solution do you have to propose then? (bolded the word "better" for a reason, as I very much expect worse ideas than mine to drop in this topic, real ridiculous proposals in other words.)

Finally, this has been tested already in China (yes I know they aren't really a model in general), and it's not that much of a bad result. Thus, it's beyond "theory". Another thumb up for mine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Child_Policy

The Chinese government introduced the policy in 1979 to alleviate social, economic, and environmental problems in China,[4] and authorities claim that the policy has prevented more than 250 million births from its implementation to 2000.[2]

Since the introduction of the one-child policy, the fertility rate in China has fallen from over three births per woman in 1980 (already a sharp reduction from more than five births per woman in the early 1970s) to approximately 1.8 births in 2008.[24]

In total, the Chinese government estimates that it has three to four hundred million fewer people in 2008, with the one-child policy, than it would have had otherwise.[25][26] Chinese authorities thus consider the policy as a great success in helping to implement China's current economic growth. The reduction in the fertility rate and thus population growth has reduced the severity of problems that come with overpopulation, like epidemics, slums, overwhelmed social services (such as health, education, law enforcement), and strain on the ecosystem from abuse of fertile land and production of high volumes of waste.

I wouldn't call that ridiculous...

I don't suggest the forced abortion and infanticides that came along in China should be implemented, of course...
My plan of course includes that homosexual couples adopting children (them coming from artificial insemination asked by the couple or orphean origins) is forbidden. They naturally can't have children, so no need to add another factor of population growth that doesn't even exist in nature!

I seriously wouldnt hold up chinas one child policy to any kind of light at all if i were you.

Lets just examine how the policy was implemented shall we?

- Forced abortions (as you've mentioned)

- Forced vasectomies for those men who insisted on having more than one child, this was highly pursued in the rual areas where the authorities could keep it quieter than in cities and in some cases it was a forced castration!

- female babies left to die in the street, as the femal line doesnt carry on the family and females cant be as helpful as men aroudn the rual areas

oh and to top it all off china now faces one of the world biggest problems with regards to its populace, that is there simply arent enough women any more. There are it is suggested at least 5 maybe more men for every 1 women in china. Yeap the one child policy, way to shoot yourself in the foot

Kit-Fox wrote:I seriously wouldnt hold up chinas one child policy to any kind of light at all if i were you.

Lets just examine how the policy was implemented shall we?

- Forced abortions (as you've mentioned)

- Forced vasectomies for those men who insisted on having more than one child, this was highly pursued in the rual areas where the authorities could keep it quieter than in cities and in some cases it was a forced castration!

- female babies left to die in the street, as the femal line doesnt carry on the family and females cant be as helpful as men aroudn the rual areas

oh and to top it all off china now faces one of the world biggest problems with regards to its populace, that is there simply arent enough women any more. There are it is suggested at least 5 maybe more men for every 1 women in china. Yeap the one child policy, way to shoot yourself in the foot

That's because of common ridiculous belief that it's better to have a boy than a girl. Causing much troubles in countries like China and India. As it did in past in Europe.
If those stupid beliefs didn't exist, there wouldnt be issues in China regarding girls (and outside of China, I need to find sources, but I think I remember same problems happening in India with girls being lowly considered).
As I said, I don't support excess ways to make the policy work. For once, I'm sure reasoning could actually work better than "repression".
Removing women is completly retarded. I think we could imagine the outcome from this...*cough*homosexuality increase*cough*

i really cannot comprehend the hysteria surrounding the population and the environment, hysteria which has exploded since the early 70's, i know because i saw its beginnings and cannot believe the madness that has gripped rational and normal people and made them think there is a problem when there isn't!


population control and climate change...LIES AND MADNESS!!!

[KMA]Avenger wrote:i really cannot comprehend the hysteria surrounding the population and the environment, hysteria which has exploded since the early 70's, i know because i saw its beginnings and cannot believe the madness that has gripped rational and normal people and made them think there is a problem when there isn't!


population control and climate change...LIES AND MADNESS!!!

If you wouldn't mind Japan's pop density spread in the whole world, it's your problem. However, I'm not really fond of a 12bil world population by the end of century...

People are not worth saving. Let them all die.


I refer you to my sig, twice. First to the first one, then to the second one. Then weep.

Universe wrote:People are not worth saving. Let them all die.


I refer you to my sig, twice. First to the first one, then to the second one. Then weep.

Jim, i may be off on this one as i've no actual proof, but i think that France is currently trying to encourage more children?

and i know that alot of countries consider themselves under populated, and while i don't really agree with abortion or even adoption to a degree.

i don't think being forced to limit the birth of children is right at all, what about some of the worse off countries who have families who have 8 or 9 children because they know so many children of their children will die they need some security.

Universe wrote:People are not worth saving. Let them all die.


I refer you to my sig, twice. First to the first one, then to the second one. Then weep.

Meh.

Then (let's consider that as being true) I wonder why it was such an issue about people suffering from deceases like the flu...if all the people aren't worth saving (what you said, if we were to actually take it as true), then it's not a problem if people don't vaccine themselves for some illness, even if it was to be your neighboors (as afterall, people aren't worth saving, and all of us are people).

PS: this wasn't really better than my proposal!

@Q man: Because France's politicians are sometimes silly and act all naively...

Jim, answer me a couple questions please...

what difference does it make if there are 6 billion, 60 billion, or 6 trillion people on the planet so long as there is enough room, food and resources for all?

also please explain to me why we have to many people when its fact (go look for yourself) that western populations are declining.

at the end of the day, i am SICK TO DEATH of people jumping through the hoops being held out by the politicians and the media ...


politician: OMG! TO MANY PEOPLE!

media person: OMG! ARE YOU SERIOUS?

politician: YES, TO MANY PEOPLE, WE CANT FEED THEM, WE CANT HOUSE THEM...WE ARE ALL DOOMED SAY THE SCIENTIST!

media person: which scientists?

politician: ALL OF THEM!!!

media person reports to the people: OMG, POLITICIANS AND SCIENTISTS AGREE WE ARE ALL DOOMED BECAUSE THE EVIL PEOPLE OF THE WORLD ARE HAVING TO MANY BABIES...YOU BAD PEOPLE!!!

the stupid people who are to lazy and dumbed down on fluoride [spoiler]Here is a German reporter talking about fluoride in Nazi camps:

The first occurrence of fluoridated drinking water on Earth was found in Germany's Nazi prison camps. The Gestapo had little concern about fluoride's supposed effect on children's teeth; their alleged reason for mass-medicating water with sodium fluoride was to sterilize humans and force the people in their concentration camps into calm submission. (Ref. book: "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" by Joseph Borkin.)




The following letter was received by the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee Wisconsin, on 2 October 1954, from Mr. Charles Perkins, a chemist:

"I have your letter of September 29 asking for further documentation regarding a statement made in my book, The Truth About Water Fluoridation, to the effect that the idea of water fluoridation was brought to England from Russia by the Russian Communist Kreminoff. "In the 1930's, Hitler and the German Nazi's envisioned a world to be dominated and controlled by a Nazi philosophy of pan-Germanism. The German chemists worked out a very ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass-control which was submitted to and adopted by the German General Staff. This plan was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water supplies. By this method they could control the population in whole areas, reduce population by water medication that would produce sterility in women, and so on. In this scheme of mass-control, sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place. ...

"Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride will in time reduce an individual's power to resist domination, by slowly poisoning and narcotizing a certain area of the brain, thus making him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him. [A convenient light lobotomy]

"The real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children's teeth. If this were the real reason there are many ways in which it could be done that are much easier, cheaper, and far more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty.

"When the Nazis under Hitler decided to go into Poland, both the German General Staff and the Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans, and personnel, and the scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to communize the world. ...

"I was told of this entire scheme by a German chemist who was an official of the great IG Farben chemical industries and was also prominent in the Nazi movement at the time. I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years' research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology of fluorine--any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person mentally or physically."
CHARLES E. PERKINS, Chemist, 2 October 1954.[/spoiler]: OMG!!! TO MANY PEOPLE, LETS ONLY HAVE 1 CHILD AND CONDEMN ANYONE WHO DISAGREES!!!

Q man was actually right, politicians are quite thinking the opposite "ohhh it's wonderful we got highest rate of EU woooot".
What I said isn't only about Western Countries, it is firstly meant towards those doing it like rabbits ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ferti ... _map_2.png , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Popul ... ensity.png Mix those two maps and find out which areas are most concerned). And well, we got some people in our countries, who most of time, come from same countries who practice the rabbit way (people from Africa, Middle East..).

Enough room? There would be a need of TWO Earthes to contain the world population to decrease damages to the planet. You are still into your "texas can hold world population & food supply needed" I suppose? D'oh. Keep your Macao pop density dreams for yourself!

i don't think being forced to limit the birth of children is right at all, what about some of the worse off countries who have families who have 8 or 9 children because they know so many children of their children will die they need some security.

That's probably why Earth population grew more in the last 80 years than the millions of years before?
People still think death rate is high, while it's not anymore. It caused an explosion of world population.

# Yet faster growth from the start of the Industrial Revolution around 1700AD. About 1 billion persons estimated by 1804.
# At over 6.7 billion[4] World Population is approximately 3 times higher in 2009 than it was at approximately 2.3 billion or less[5] in 1939, despite loss of life during World War II (an upper estimate of which is some 72 million).
# Dramatic growth since around 1950 coinciding with greatly increased food production as a result of the heavy industrialisation of agriculture (known as the Green Revolution). Population is forecast to carry on growing to 8.9 billion, 9.2 billion[3], 9.5 billion[4] or perhaps even 11 billion by 2050.

you didn't answer my question Jim!

also, who told you there are to many people on the planet anyway?