Peak Oil News and Message Boards

This is a detailed poll on various options for population control/reduction. Which would you support ?

Comments are greatly appreciated.

Btu

Start by removing the giveaways for having kids. No tax breaks, no allowances.

If that doesn't produce the desired effects, start increasing tax takes with number of kids to fund the extra requirements (eg more kids = more education costs = higher taxes)

And if even that doesn't do the job, start charging for extra health costs.

And finally, if even more is needed, make people take test to prove the are capable to be good parents (not just the practical)


Each is justifiable and can be politically spun to get through.

I picked all of the above...however, I still contend that a more proactive approach would be beneficial.

Smallpox, I-131, all that sort of thing.

Again, the no-brainer is providing free family planning in the Third World. This step would be cheap and effective.

garyp wrote:And finally, if even more is needed, make people take test to prove the are capable to be good parents (not just the practical)

Do you mean 'genetic screening' to make sure people have no biological flaws in their make-up?

JP

guaran-damn-tee you Alex Jones will be linking to this thread and saying "You see!!! Peak Oil is all part of a plan by the globalists to reduce the population. Here on their own forums you can read about it. Their own documents right here out in the open!!!"

Jack wrote:I picked all of the above...however, I still contend that a more proactive approach would be beneficial.

Smallpox, I-131, all that sort of thing.

He Jack, I didn't know they still made the old HAL series! You're still sounding good, don't let that lack of spare transistors let you down, bud...

JP (grin)

MattSavinar wrote:guaran-damn-tee you Alex Jones will be linking to this thread and saying "You see!!! Peak Oil is all part of a plan by the globalists to reduce the population. Here on their own forums you can read about it. Their own documents right here out in the open!!!"

And LATOC??

JP

I know a girl who doesn't have kids who works 4 part time jobs (babysitting/fast food/helps mentally ill kids/substitute teaches) and she doesn't have health insurance. She went down and talked to some state workers and they told her in so many words that she needed to get pregnant to qualify for state health insurance (which is pretty good from what i hear) Badgercare. I'm not saying these people are bad because they get it (who wouldn't take it?).

I have a new baby right now and i'm just starting to get the bills. Ouch! I'm glad i have crappy insurance, because it just makes it that much easier to conclude that i want NO more children (1 and done).

Good thread. Glad you brought this up.

My ideas for population control include, but not limited to: The elimination of all tax benefits for having children, requiring every parent with an extra dime to spare to pay for their child's education (sliding scale based on need, up to max of 2 kids...NO support above that level), as well as an outright ban on teens having children.

Another thing I would love to see is parental licensing...want a kid, you'd be required to go through an exhaustive (and very expensive to boot) permitting process, which would include child rearing classes, screening for drug / alcohol abuse, behavioral classes (no criminals need apply, of course)...and yes, I would require every set of parents to be *married*...and to sign a 18-year commitment to *stay* married for each child they are licensed to have. With these kinds of controls in place, that should take care about 70% of pregnancies, at least in countries such as the US and Canada.

Furthermore, to greatly reduce the number of "oops" pregnancies, I would offer a lump sum payment to every person turning 18 who *choose* to be sterilized...this would probably have to be in the order of $5000 - $10,000 per person...I know it's a lot, but it sure would be worth it...LOL.

I do think any meaningful attempt at population reduction would require that the fertility rate be lowered to .75 or lower, down from the 2.0 or so we have here in America today. And this level needs to be adhered to for at least 100 years or so, to let the existing population "age out" in a more or less natural fashion (if such a thing is even possible in the decades to come).

MattSavinar wrote:guaran-damn-tee you Alex Jones will be linking to this thread and saying "You see!!! Peak Oil is all part of a plan by the globalists to reduce the population. Here on their own forums you can read about it. Their own documents right here out in the open!!!"

I am not really worried about what Alex Jones might make of this. I think that planned population reduction is preferable to genocidal wars or starvation. I bet most readers of this site are simply interested in finding ethical ways to achieve it, namely by providing incentives and means to reduce birthrates. Alex Jones and his friends seem to be alarmed more by the option mentioned by Jack, which I didn't include in the poll since -- with all due respect to Jack -- I find it unacceptable.

Btu

PS: By the way, I want to congratulate you for the work you have done to raise awareness of PO.

You guys are killing me You sound either like heartless thugs or eugenics has-beens.

Aren't any of you paying attention? Each of the advanced, first world nations has a declining population. Shouldn't that tell you something?
Like working hard to make sure the second and third tier countries advance as fast as possible.
Already, China is seeing a moderation of their population growth.

It's going to be a race. How quickly can we dissemination an advanced technological culture, in order to mitigate population growth. Balanced against diminishing petroleum (high) that we are currently running on.

If you think the global population is going to voluntarily get itself out of the crisis that is now underway, have I got a non-impact, carbon free, perpetual motion, energy generator, I can sell you.
All we can do is attempt to mitigate the nightmare.
As soon as you start hating children your culture is dead. All that's left is waiting for the clock to run out.

RdSnt wrote:You guys are killing me You sound either like heartless thugs or eugenics has-beens.

Heartless thugs ? Huh ?

Eugenics was about "improving" the human race by stopping the supposedly "inferior" from reproducing. It had nothing to do with population reduction, afaik.

RdSnt wrote:Aren't any of you paying attention? Each of the advanced, first world nations has a declining population. Shouldn't that tell you something?Like working hard to make sure the second and third tier countries advance as fast as possible.

Haven't you paid any attention ? There are not enough resources left to bring the rest of the world to the standard of living of Europe/US/Japan, at least within the current model of development. The planet would be reduced to goo if we tried. If you read the resource estimates forum of this site, you might convince yourself that there also isn't enough time left to achieve such a feat. We are already in overshoot and time is running out *fast*.

RdSnt wrote:Already, China is seeing a moderation of their population growth.

Hmmm, might that be because they implemented a ONE CHILD POLICY more than a decade ago ? Hello ?!?

RdSnt wrote:It's going to be a race. How quickly can we dissemination an advanced technological culture, in order to mitigate population growth. Balanced against diminishing petroleum (high) that we are currently running on.

Knock ! Knock ! THERE IS NO TIME LEFT !

RdSnt wrote: If you think the global population is going to voluntarily get itself out of the crisis that is now underway, have I got a non-impact, carbon free, perpetual motion, energy generator, I can sell you.All we can do is attempt to mitigate the nightmare. As soon as you start hating children your culture is dead. All that's left is waiting for the clock to run out.

Who said anything about hating children !?!

Here is a question for you. Do you think that a couple in Somalia who keeps having children in that hell of a place just because they don't care about contraception or because they want more hands to work their land actually cares what happens to those children after they are born ? Would you say that they love children just because they make lots of them ? Or perhaps they like unprotected sex, consequences be damned ?

JPL wrote:He Jack, I didn't know they still made the old HAL series! You're still sounding good, don't let that lack of spare transistors let you down, bud...

JP (grin)

Believe me, you haven't known rejection until you're an obsolete model. Oh, they'll all say how they like the old operating system, and talk about legacy software...but you'll see them sneaking off to use the new quad-core machines at every chance.

It's discrimination, I tell you!

If I had a heart, it would be breaking. As matters stand, I must content myself with a low harmonic hum. And occasional file loss errors.

MattSavinar wrote:guaran-damn-tee you Alex Jones will be linking to this thread and saying "You see!!! Peak Oil is all part of a plan by the globalists to reduce the population. Here on their own forums you can read about it. Their own documents right here out in the open!!!"

Matt, there's no need to worry about that any more. Alex Jones seems to think he can awaken the sheep. Does he really imagine we, the controlling elite, didn't intend for him to see the little party in the Bohemian Grove? Does he imagine that the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderbergers actually control anything - as if we would ever permit something so obvious and well known to have any power?

These are all merely deceptions, designed to distract. As with any good disinformation system, there is, at the core, another, deeper lie - which the gullible will accept, since they have become emotionally invested in it.

Soon enough, the truth will be fully displayed. It is too late for the foolish masses to evade their destiny. The various groups are all fingers of a hand, seemingly separate but actually working under the control of a single will.

Let Alex Jones say what he will. The pruning of the useless eaters is nearly at hand. Soon enough, the herd will be culled - and the herd will, once again, do our work for us. They will do it willingly, eagerly - they will foam at the mouth in their eagerness, as we turn them one against the other.

And we will remain, safe, secure, and well fed. As for where we will be...that must remain our secret for a time. Perhaps we will permit Mr. Jones to observe another of our festivals after famine begins to produce its worthwhile results - we may even let him titillate the masses by describing the aroma of steak.

While we are linked globally, one of the ideas that we need to get our heads around is how things are going to become local. Population rise/density is one of these.

I am well aware of world wide population statistics and the total growth, but this varies massively from area to area. We need to look at the local situation to find what controls if any are needed. We are arguing about a 'one-size-fits-all' solution, where we must start thinking on a more local level.

USA is way down the list with a population rise of only 0,6% (mid 2006-mid 2007). But what can we do about those at the top of the list? Eg.
Niger 3,4%
Mali 3,3%
East Timor 3,3%
Yemen 3,2%
Uganda 3,1%
Liberia 3,1%
Guinea-Bissau 3,1%
Chad 3,1%
Senegal 3,0%
Eritrea 3,0%
Dem.Rep. of Congo 3,0%
Burundi 3,0%
Burkina Faso 3,0%
Benin 3,0%
Somalia 2,9%
Palestinian Territory 2,9%
......

Maybe the debate should be about what the USA is going to do the the 1,8+ million extra people that it is adding to its population each year. Here in Europe we have different dynamics, such as in many places the population is in decline, or only growing through immigration.

Think globally act locally

[/end of rant]

IslandCrow wrote:I am well aware of world wide population statistics and the total growth, but this varies massively from area to area. We need to look at the local situation to find what controls if any are needed. We are arguing about a 'one-size-fits-all' solution, where we must start thinking on a more local level.

USA is way down the list with a population rise of only 0,6% (mid 2006-mid 2007). But what can we do about those at the top of the list? Eg.

Niger 3,4%

......

The problem with your argument is that the ecological footprint of the average citizen of a rich nation is MUCH larger than that of a citizen in a poor nation.

Reducing the population of the latter, even massively, would not solve the problem and any double standard would be viewed as politically unacceptable.

Btu

btu2012 wrote:The problem with your argument is that the ecological footprint of the average citizen of a rich nation is MUCH larger than that of a citizen in a poor nation.

Once FF are less and less available and consumerist lifestyle is "defeated" by default, those ecological footprints will be comparable (unless we return to open colonialism).

Reducing the population of the latter, even massively, would
not solve the problem and any double standard would be viewed as politically unacceptable.

Reducing by design population of the former will not be politically acceptable either...
Anyway population of the former (say EU or Japan) is currently reducing (and US increase is largely due to immigration from Mexico) and population on the latter is increasing...

btu2012 wrote:Here is a question for you. Do you think that a couple in Somalia who keeps having children in that hell of a place just because they don't care about contraception or because they want more hands to work their land actually cares what happens to those children after they are born ? Would you say that they love children just because they make lots of them ? Or perhaps they like unprotected sex, consequences be damned ?

Sam Kinison wrote:You want to help world hunger? Stop sending them food. Don't send them another bite, send them U-Hauls. Send them a guy that says, "You know, we've been coming here giving you food for about 35 years now and we were driving through the desert, and we realized there wouldn't BE world hunger if you people would live where the FOOD IS! YOU LIVE IN A DESERT!! UNDERSTAND THAT? YOU LIVE IN A FUCKING DESERT!! NOTHING GROWS HERE! NOTHING'S GONNA GROW HERE! Come here, you see this? This is sand. You know what it's gonna be 100 years from now? IT'S GONNA BE SAND!! YOU LIVE IN A FUCKING DESERT! We have deserts in America, we just don't live in them, assholes!"

You should publish, Jack, you've a way with words. "Jack's Little Instruction Book."

5 grand to have the tubes tied? Fuck that, give 'em an iPhone. You think I jest?

We will have to eat something!