The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child policy

[spud_meister]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

I think we should try the policy out on liberals first.

yeah, wouldn't make a difference on conservatives, who barely get laid anyway

 

[Partisan]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

Good point. And I am still trying to figure out how people think they could go about enforcing such a policy. Especially when they say the whole world should adopt this cruel policy. Should countries who refuse to adopt this policy be sanctioned? Should people who break this law be thrown in jail? I mean, accidents will always happen, so will they build huge abortion clinics all over the world to get rid of all the 'illegal' babies?

And we've all seen the ugly side of this policy in China when people throw away baby girls because they value male babies more. And I saw a documentary about orphan girls in China who were neglected and starved to death in orphanages because nobody wants them and because government officials there simply don't care what happens to them. And people are forced to get abortions, or they just kill the baby after she is born if it's a girl.

Yeah, let's turn the entire world into Communist China. It makes a lot more sense than just investing more in education. Improving education is just crazy! That doesn't make sense at all. Ignore all the evidence that shows that every country that has increased literacy for women and provided better education for its population in general always lowered the birth rates as well. There is no possible connection there... /sarcasm]

A one child policy would be the biggest most invasive government program you can imagine. And only a police state like China can enforce something like that. This whole idea is just stupid.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here & say you either are a teacher, or aspire to be one......
Not that it's bad, mind you....
I agree, improving literacy can't hurt....

 

[liblady]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

We need to stop sending foreign aid to countries that have artificially inflated populations.....

artificially inflated?

 

[The Prof]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

Good point. And I am still trying to figure out how people think they could go about enforcing such a policy. Especially when they say the whole world should adopt this cruel policy. Should countries who refuse to adopt this policy be sanctioned? Should people who break this law be thrown in jail? I mean, accidents will always happen, so will they build huge abortion clinics all over the world to get rid of all the 'illegal' babies?

And we've all seen the ugly side of this policy in China when people throw away baby girls because they value male babies more. And I saw a documentary about orphan girls in China who were neglected and starved to death in orphanages because nobody wants them and because government officials there simply don't care what happens to them. And people are forced to get abortions, or they just kill the baby after she is born if it's a girl.

Yeah, let's turn the entire world into Communist China. It makes a lot more sense than just investing more in education. Improving education is just crazy! That doesn't make sense at all. Ignore all the evidence that shows that every country that has increased literacy for women and provided better education for its population in general always lowered the birth rates as well. There is no possible connection there... /sarcasm]

A one child policy would be the biggest most invasive government program you can imagine. And only a police state like China can enforce something like that. This whole idea is just stupid.

nothing could be more meanly misogynist than a one child policy

nothing this side of sharia law, that is

 

[Partisan]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

artificially inflated?

Yup......
You're countries/continents population is artificially inflated when you rely on foreign aid instead of your own resources to prop up said population beyond what is sutainable.....
IE, the law of nature.....
I'm tired of seeing these bleeding heart beggars on TV, touting the buck a day crap.....
While the CEO's reap big, fat paychecks....
The amounts that actually get through are abyssmal....
Famine is nature's penalty for stupidity.....

 

[Rachel]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

I'm gonna go out on a limb here & say you either are a teacher, or aspire to be one......
Not that it's bad, mind you....
I agree, improving literacy can't hurt....

There you go trying to be funny again.
How is that working out for you?
Well, as long as you're enjoying yourself...

Cya!

 

[Rachel]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

nothing could be more meanly misogynist than a one child policy

nothing this side of sharia law, that is

I agree with you completely. There's apparently a lot of that going around.

Unfortunately there are no quick fixes. And countries that try to control society in this way have some of the worst human rights records.

 

[Partisan]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

nothing could be more meanly misogynist than a one child policy

nothing this side of sharia law, that is

Why is it misogynist?......
No one is decreeing what gender child survives....
To choose male survivors is just a manifestation of values already apparently in place....
The curious thing is that is the exact opposite in nature, ie one male can service many females & maintain the population....

 

[j-mac]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

I read somewhere that it takes 2.1 children, or something like that to sustain a population. Where does China fall in that regard?


j-mac

 

[Partisan]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

I read somewhere that it takes 2.1 children, or something like that to sustain a population. Where does China fall in that regard?


j-mac

Good question, but I'm sure they have halted expontential growth....
With a billion+ people, I'm sure they can recover any precipituos drop....

 

[j-mac]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

Good question, but I'm sure they have halted expontential growth....
With a billion+ people, I'm sure they can recover any precipituos drop....

Or go back to concurring other nations for land mass.


j-mac

 

[Toothpicvic]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

That's what happens when politicians meddle in peoples' personal lives...

Politicians such as Sarah Palin and most of the Christian Reich. Definitely

 

[Toothpicvic]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

because some moms and dads might dream of having a large family is "beyond" you, you find one child per a "good idea?"

i am stunned at your lack of understanding and intolerance for aspirations different than your own

Which is why I said "obviously I wouldn't condone forcing anyone to do it". I just said it would be a good idea in my opinion if people did it voluntarily. Unless you're very wealthy, it's very hard to properly raise a large family anyway.

 

[Erod]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

haha No, I was suggesting great minds think alike. I immediately thought of Idiocracy before I read it in your post.

Ah, gotcha. Misread your post.

Dumb movie with a really interesting concept. Wasn't the president a pro wrestler and the vice president was a porn star or something? That's where we're headed.

 

[carlkay58]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

Ah, gotcha. Misread your post.

Dumb movie with a really interesting concept. Wasn't the president a pro wrestler and the vice president was a porn star or something? That's where we're headed.

We're all headed to Minnesota?
:mrgreen:

 

[Renae]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

Arrogance...

What I Meant Was You People Should Only Have One Child
"The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child policy," writes Canadian journalist Diane Francis, mother of two.

What I Meant Was You People Should Only Have One Child - Jim Geraghty on National Review Online
Diane Francis' Life

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

Yup......
You're countries/continents population is artificially inflated when you rely on foreign aid instead of your own resources to prop up said population beyond what is sutainable.....

So, does that mean that because north america ships out so much of the food it produces that it's population is artificially 'deflated'??

IE, the law of nature.....
I'm tired of seeing these bleeding heart beggars on TV, touting the buck a day crap.....
While the CEO's reap big, fat paychecks....
The amounts that actually get through are abyssmal....
Famine is nature's penalty for stupidity.....

Not to mention that if you really look deep into many of those 'buck a day' foundations, they advocate mass sterilization, forced abortions, etc on essentially all the poorest nations of africa.

What does everyone think the earth's carrying capacity for humans is?

Realistically speaking, if we maxmized the use of the earths land that CAN be used to produce food was used, and maybe some other programs to ensure that the food and water needs of the people are met, you could probably see a human population of 25-30 billion before the ressources of the world would be truly stretched to the limit.

The 'politically correct' answer by a group that I cannot remember the name of is 1 billion. They were very active (and claimed Al Gore as a charter member) in advertising this fact for about 20 years ago. They were pushing a 'one child' law for the world, enforced sterilization of all drop-outs, reduction of medical care to the underdeveloped nations of the world, and some other quite drastic measures to get rid of the 6 billion or so extra people in the world.

That's not the 'politically correct' answer by any stretch... one of the few groups you could be referring to is the 'club of rome'. But, yes, in their opinions (and those at the core of why we even have a global warming debate) the optimal world population is 500million to less then 1 billion people. I've even found some head biologists get a standing ovation for declaring humanity a parasite that needs to be completely eradicated.

These folks used to take out two page ad spreads in National Parks magazine in the 1980s and early 1990s. This is the official publication of the National Parks - a government owned and operated publication. They are why I stopped donating to the National Parks.

Yes, these people also believe in some sort of pagan 'gaia' religion... and aim to make that religion the 'religion of the new world'.... which in the book 'final revolution' was going to be accomplished through the use of 'carbon taxes' and global warming to make "humanity the enemy of mankind".

Look... sounds incredible... I couldn't make that stuff up if I wanted to. If you care that much to disprove me, go read 1968's "limits to growth" and 1991's "the final revolution" both claiming the same thing.

Listen... if you really think the world is overpopulated : (not that I'm advocating that people do this) but get the ball rolling and start by reducing the population by your 1.

Don't ally yourself with those sick biologists that claim to love the idea that there will eventually be some 'airborne ebola-pox' that will kill off 90% of the worlds population... and they are sad that they and their family must die in the process, but it's 'necessary'.

 

[Partisan]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

So, does that mean that because north america ships out so much of the food it produces that it's population is artificially 'deflated'??
No, it means we have a surplus....
Some of these other nations should try that sometime....

Not to mention that if you really look deep into many of those 'buck a day' foundations, they advocate mass sterilization, forced abortions, etc on essentially all the poorest nations of africa.

^^^^ A step in the right direction....

Realistically speaking, if we maxmized the use of the earths land that CAN be used to produce food was used, and maybe some other programs to ensure that the food and water needs of the people are met, you could probably see a human population of 25-30 billion before the ressources of the world would be truly stretched to the limit.

^^^^Handouts by any other name are still handouts...

That's not the 'politically correct' answer by any stretch... one of the few groups you could be referring to is the 'club of rome'. But, yes, in their opinions (and those at the core of why we even have a global warming debate) the optimal world population is 500million to less then 1 billion people. I've even found some head biologists get a standing ovation for declaring humanity a parasite that needs to be completely eradicated.



Yes, these people also believe in some sort of pagan 'gaia' religion... and aim to make that religion the 'religion of the new world'.... which in the book 'final revolution' was going to be accomplished through the use of 'carbon taxes' and global warming to make "humanity the enemy of mankind".

Look... sounds incredible... I couldn't make that stuff up if I wanted to. If you care that much to disprove me, go read 1968's "limits to growth" and 1991's "the final revolution" both claiming the same thing.

Listen... if you really think the world is overpopulated : (not that I'm advocating that people do this) but get the ball rolling and start by reducing the population by your 1.

Don't ally yourself with those sick biologists that claim to love the idea that there will eventually be some 'airborne ebola-pox' that will kill off 90% of the worlds population... and they are sad that they and their family must die in the process, but it's 'necessary'.

I see no good reason to stretch the Earth's resources to the limit....
Ending foreign aid to the countries that have artificially high populations is logical......
The rest of your post is blather....

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: The real inconvenient truth The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child poli

So, does that mean that because north america ships out so much of the food it produces that it's population is artificially 'deflated'??
No, it means we have a surplus....
Some of these other nations should try that sometime....

Ya, its not quite as simple as giving a person an acre of land and saying 'your a farmer now, good luck.'

Except if a consistant food 'deficit' means an 'inflated population' then a 'surplus' of food means your population is 'deflated'... I'm just saying, if you're gonna use it for one measure it should apply to the opposite.

^^^^ A step in the right direction....

Listen, friend, the same people engaging in these things in the third world are trying to initiate such programs for the rest of the world. Look at John P Holdren's 'ecoscience' where he discusses putting a sterilant in america's water supplies the antidote would be given to succesful parental applicants.

^^^^Handouts by any other name are still handouts...

I'm not talking about 'handouts' I'm talking that if the ressources were spread as such that everyone had the requirements for their survival that there is room in the world and the ressources to sustain a population that is MUCH higher.

I see no good reason to stretch the Earth's resources to the limit....

I agree... but we are so far from that limit that talking about reducing the population is nothing more then the dreams of someone advocating genocide.

Ending foreign aid to the countries that have artificially high populations is logical......

If instead of 'foreign aid' we supplied people with the means to feed themselves, then you'd find that the 'artificially high' populations would increase populations while they develop and then the growth curve would slow down.

Instead it's just : Too many people, who do we kill first.

The rest of your post is blather....

Blather that is the BASIS for your held opinion whether you accept that fact or not. Simply put, you've aligned yourself with an anti-human genocidal religion. No different then those in the millitary that know only what they need to know.

Not to mention that I showed you where to start looking to see that I'm not just 'blowing smoke'. I could give you a whole list of sources that you won't bother to look at all propagating the same lie that the world is overpopulated and that depopulation programs are 'necessary' and / or 'good'.

Like I said before: If you really think the world is over populated, lead by example and kill yourself. Now, I don't want you to kill yourself, but really... you want to reduce the worlds population start with yourself.