Population control?

Question

So i am watching a program on the discovery channel about over crowding in urban areas and they are discussing making huge buildings over double the height and four times the width of any building in existance today. This would help with overcrowding in the city. my question is since mankind is approaching this problem now do you think populaton control sounds like a good idea? Not like China does with forced abortions, but maybe with tax based incentives for not having children and penalties for having more than three. I know there is pleanty of room in this world but dont really want to see it all taken up by urban sprawl.

Also not to forget the drain on resources, the polution, and increased crime that will come with continued population growth. Really isnt 6 billion enough?

Answer 1

I certainly think the growing population should warrant as much if not more concern as the terrorist do. If we do not take steps very soon to control our population we will be in dire straights. There is a limited amount of resources and we are using them up at a phenominal rate. I like your incentive theory, but I would like to take it a step forward...if a person is going to receive welfare, they need to provide proof they can have no more children. Yeah, I know people will throw a hissy fit about this, but if you think about it, it is beneficial to all parties involved.

Answer 2

What I don't understand is how a huge, oversized building that holds four times as many people as any apartment building in existence is going to ease overcrowding in the city? Typical wrong approach.

Tax incentives sound good, but would only work on the people who pay taxes. Hmmm.

Someday nature will take care of things. But until then, trying to convince people to stop having children is a lost cause.

Answer 3

I don't really like the idea of the state meddling in something so intimate and private as family size. I'm afraid that government incentives would eventually evolve into government mandates, as is often the case.

Moreover, I don't think it's really necessary. Most developed nations are now seeing population decline, and are worried about keeping pension plans and social assistance going with a smaller and smaller tax base. Population growth does still occur in the undeveloped parts of the world. I think the best solution to their growth is to ensure that those areas develop economically. If the poorer, high-growth areas of the world see a rise in standard of living and education, they will be able to not only better provide for all the hungry mouths, but to see population growth slow down as well. Perhaps if India and Latin America and Africa advance as Western Europe did, they will also see the corresponding decline in birth rates. If these parts of the world develop strong, stable civil institutions and implement market and trade reforms, they could kill two birds (poverty and overpopulation) with one stone.

Even if we can't reverse population growth, the scenario for the world is not as gloomy as it may be portrayed. We can easily see the negative effects of population growth- crowding, pollution, conflict- but the good effects we do not see. These include innovation, an increased labor force, and more specialization of labor. Great inventors are rare; with a higher population, we will see many more of them. With a higher number of geniuses and creative people, we may be able to come up with clever and innovative solutions to the bad parts of population growth (like new pollution reduction techniques) and still keep the good parts.

Answer 4

That might work, but it is unlikely to change things considering many of the countries that have many children are already distitute and many dont pay tax. It has been shown that the more income in an area the less children they have so to reduce population we need to end poverty and educate poor countries about birth control. Some countries like canada actually have negative populations, so in order to maintain population we have to bring in immigrants, so not every country is actually a problem, I think eventually things will work out... or we just might have a pandemic of something and that will bring down the population (sad but true).

Answer 5

You've got it exactly backwards. Here's what's going on and why it will continue:

Don't know in which country you live but developed countries need MORE people, not less, and have incentives of one sort or another to encourage people to have more kids.

This isn't true in the US as it has TONS of immigrants who tend to have more children than people already established in the country.

So, what's the point? Simply this: more young people means more workers means more people to pay the old folks' social welfare costs. In the US these are Social Security and Medicare.

And for the non-oldsters the social welfare costs that require ever more workers is Medicaid - the program in the worst shape after Medicare which is in much worse condition that SS.

In the US we BETTER have more and more people (working) or there's gonna be HELL TO PAY when the checks stop rolling in!

Answer 6

Forced population control gets into really big human rights issues, but I see your point. Last time I checked, the real big problems of overpopulation werent in the US, but overseas, but I havent really focused too much on details. If we could begin working within a global community framework, we could promote and teach the young about responsible stewardship of the land and and population balance. Really it has a lot to do with education and balance of power. Once women are treated equally to men on a larger global scale, children are fed and educated, and the balance of power is more equal among the "races", over breeding and proliferation will slow.

Answer 7

Noooooo, but anyway the Illuminati plan a reduction of world population,of 80 %, and it is for real.

They are the Illuminatis, and they own you,
This is the New World Order, and it is your future if the world don't wake up :

And this is what Bush’s minions had to say in 2000;-
"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor"
Project for the New American Century (2000)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
Hermann Göring(Nazi) 1946 Confessions (Nuremberg Diary)
http://www.snopes2.com/quotes/goering.htm

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
David Rockefeller: Statement to the United Nations Business Council in September 1994

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with other around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." David Rockefellers memoirs (2002)

Make you investigations about Jesuits, the New World Order, the Illuminatis, the Free-Masonery, the Death Clan. They plan a world reduction of population of 80%...Far worse than Hitler...

1. Monetary and sex bribery was to be used to obtain control of men already in high places in the various levels of all governments and other fields of endeavor. Once influential persons had fallen for the lies, deceits, and temptations of the Illuminati, they were to be held in bondage by application of political and other forms of blackmail, threats of financial ruin, public exposure, and physical harm, even death to themselves and loved members of their families.

2. The Illuminati who were on the faculty of colleges and universities were to cultivate students possessing exceptional mental ability and who belonged to well-bred families with international leanings, and recommend them for special training in Internationalism. Such training was to be provided by granting scholarships, like the Rhodes Scholarship, to those selected by the Illuminati. All such scholars were to be first persuaded and then convinced that men of special talent and brains had the right to rule those less gifted on the grounds that the masses do not know what is best for them physically, mentally, and spiritually.

Answer 8

Since the 1960 there has been a crackpot named paul ehrlich of a group called zero population growth .
Well every 5 years or so he comes out and does his chicken little routine . Too many rich westerners , where all dead in 10 years blah blah blah
My point is people have been screaming for population control for 40 years , most of the people doing the screaming arent to be trusted .

Answer 9

If it weren't for immigration, the US would have a flat population growth & more than likely a decline. The same goes for Western Europe & Russia. I don't think that population control is really necessary.

Answer 10

I think population control is a great idea in theory, but difficult to enforce. In European countries, the population is actually shrinking and if no immigrants entered the U.S. its birthrate would be at 2.1% (which is essentially 0%) in population increase. In the U.S., the only way to stop icrease of population is to limit immigration, something which has proved to be difficult if not impoosible