U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-01-2008, 03:54 AM
 
Location: Virginia
654 posts, read 1,100,626 times
Reputation: 342

Advertisements

The number of dictators-in-training on C-D.com never ceases to amaze me. As if telling people where they think they should live in order to create their idea of a utopian communal metro area, or telling people what kind of vehicle they should and should not be allowed to drive isn't bad enough. Now our enlightened wannabe Dear Leaders want to tell everyone how many children they should be 'allowed' to have. Of course, all of this is done in the name of Gaia, the high priestess of Global Wa.....I mean Climate Change™.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-01-2008, 09:19 AM
 
Location: TX
740 posts, read 1,841,535 times
Reputation: 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by k350 View Post
That is something many people in many countries need to figure out. It is real simple, if you can't afford it, don't have it.
That's not the same as a government mandate to disallow people from having more kids, albeit by a communist regime (that also suppresses free speech). In the United States, it's "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". For many people, family is their happiness. It may not be so for you, but that does not mean others should deprived others of wanting more children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 09:23 AM
 
2,348 posts, read 3,923,103 times
Reputation: 2199
You never answered my question.

At what point, population number wise, do you think population controls need to be implemented?

What do you feel the carrying capacity is for humans?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 09:26 AM
 
1,350 posts, read 3,619,628 times
Reputation: 1264
fp1978
Your laissez-faire approach might work to make everyone feel great--for a while--what would you advocate if you knew your freedom from the dictates of power led to eventual collapse of the ability to thrive? Would you advocate intervention or just let it happen?
If you let it happen then that is fine-you stand by your principle-the right way or no way-I guess. If, however, you intervene with martial law and stern measures to temporarily avert the disaster, then you are simply waiting until it is too late to accomplish what the realists in countries of over a billion people and counting are trying to do before it is too late.
I hate being told what to do. I don't want to live under authoritarian or religious rule. If I did live in China though and was facing what they were facing for the generations to come, I would suck it up and support the one-child policy.
As far as the earthquake is concerned-this bunk about the one child policy making people childless supposes that in this disaster some of the children would have been saved. It is more likely that all would have perished as they would have been in the same place. Regardless, you don't have policy based on the what ifs of a natural disaster. The big picture for a billion people is what matters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 09:55 AM
 
Location: TX
740 posts, read 1,841,535 times
Reputation: 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by k350 View Post
You never answered my question.

At what point, population number wise, do you think population controls need to be implemented?

What do you feel the carrying capacity is for humans?
My posts already answer the questions.

"I believe that people (preferably couples) should have as many kids as they can afford and able to manage. There should not be any cap."

Your questions assume baby boom lasts forever (justifying population control), which is far from the truth. Most countries are bearing fewer children than they did 30 years ago.

Last edited by phoenix_talons; 06-01-2008 at 10:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Here... for now
1,747 posts, read 2,686,637 times
Reputation: 1222
Perhaps "have as many kids as you want" is fine in the micro, but what about in the macro? It also seems that many folks have as many kids as they "want", which is vastly different from as many kids as they can "afford"...

We, as humans, have generally placed occupancy limits on many buildings and vehicles. Our planet is a sort of vehicle, too, the one on which we each travel thorough life. Is there any occupancy limit on Earth?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 11:13 AM
 
5,823 posts, read 10,149,308 times
Reputation: 4531
So, with that, what do you think the maximum population Earth can support?

Don't bother to ask, the pro-procreation people have no idea themselves and it doesn't worry them . Their responses to that question are disarmingly infantile : "we'll transform the last virgin spaces in GMO corn fields for the growing population, who needs jungles and dangerous wild species anyway?" or "God will provide for us" or "humanity will develop enough technology to be able to colonize Mars and other planets or build cities deep under the oceans" and other BS
And what about climate change ? their answer : "it has been invented by Leftist scientists, but it's not anthropic , it's a natural process, the number of people plays no role in climate change " and other baloney
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 11:16 AM
 
2,348 posts, read 3,923,103 times
Reputation: 2199
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenix_talons View Post
My posts already answer the questions.

"I believe that people (preferably couples) should have as many kids as they can afford and able to manage. There should not be any cap."

Your questions assume baby boom lasts forever (justifying population control), which is far from the truth. Most countries are bearing fewer children than they did 30 years ago.
Once again, you did not answer my question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 01:00 PM
 
3,413 posts, read 6,450,832 times
Reputation: 1425
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenix_talons View Post
Tell that to the thousands of recently childless couples in China that lost their only child in the earthquake. China's one-child policy is crazy. I do not buy the reasons the (Communist) Chinese government give about scarcity of land and food. For all we know, it's propaganda to reinforce their authoritarian-style government. They suppress information from their people, so how do we know the policy is justified?

Singapore used to have a two-child policy beginning early 70's, for the same "reasons" as China. By the start of the 90's, there was a growing concern of 'graying' population, wherein older folks become the dominant age group. This, according to Singapore officials, could lead to severe draining of resources on medical, federal and social levels. One concern is a likely shortage of younger folks to take care of older folks. So they encouraged people to have "three or more if you can afford it".

Japan has already reached the 'graying' generation. Declining birth rates, declining population, older people increasing in great numbers. It's only going to get worse. There are ways of limiting population growth without such policy. Do what Europe does. Jack up the cost of living. Increase availability of indulgences and activities. So that people become too occupied and self-centered to want to have kids.

I don't think couples that have only one child do so because of the psychology as Nelly stated. There are only a few reasons why they have only one. One, less financially costlier than having more. Two, less burden than having more. Three, medical issues of the parent(s).

For me, I'm pro-procreation. I believe that people (preferably couples) should have as many kids as they can afford and able to manage. There should not be any cap. It isn't fair for the only child to shoulder all the responsibility of taking care of his/her parents.
Great post. Well and clearly stated. Rep point coming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2008, 01:17 PM
 
3,413 posts, read 6,450,832 times
Reputation: 1425
Quote:
Originally Posted by fp1978 View Post
The number of dictators-in-training on C-D.com never ceases to amaze me. As if telling people where they think they should live in order to create their idea of a utopian communal metro area, or telling people what kind of vehicle they should and should not be allowed to drive isn't bad enough. Now our enlightened wannabe Dear Leaders want to tell everyone how many children they should be 'allowed' to have. Of course, all of this is done in the name of Gaia, the high priestess of Global Wa.....I mean Climate Change™.
I agree. I am appalled that no concern was expressed for the 40 women physically forced to have abortions and some beaten. Can you imagine the distress of a women who wants her child being held down while it is killed in her body? That sounds like the plot for a horror movie. No outrage on this thread, no concern and no compassion for those individual women. If the Chinese government had been forcing those women to HAVE babies then these same posters would have been outraged. Dictators and dictators-in-training all have the same theme--They love mankind, it's PEOPLE they can't stand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top