First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
Post Reply Why doesn't India control its population
57 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

Mugen417 wrote:

because government social engineering doesn't work... ever....

In fact India's economy is predicted to out perform China's over the next few years and economists believe much of this stems from a healthier demographic environment in India compared to China


India had implemented planned economy for a very long time. It shifted to market economy several years after China did. So it is like China which was 15 years ago. Give India time and it will prosper.
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

dotsforlife wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

I'd rather limit who can have a kid rather than the limit to how many... Some people do not need to reproduce


That would be unethical and neo-nazi.


Call it what you will, it doesn't bother me. Fact of the matter is, there a quite a few people these days who are not fit for raising children but end up having to do so due to lack of self control. Intelligence is one thing, but I'm mainly pointing towards those who do not have the proper means to raise a child, much less the maturity to do so.

At the end of the day, if people were more responsible and sensible about procreating then there wouldn't be the need for many of the issues we face to this day.


If people were more responsible then we wouldn't face many of the issues of with population.
2047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

Sir_jamesalot wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

I'd rather limit who can have a kid rather than the limit to how many... Some people do not need to reproduce


That would be unethical and neo-nazi.


Call it what you will, it doesn't bother me. Fact of the matter is, there a quite a few people these days who are not fit for raising children but end up having to do so due to lack of self control. Intelligence is one thing, but I'm mainly pointing towards those who do not have the proper means to raise a child, much less the maturity to do so.

At the end of the day, if people were more responsible and sensible about procreating then there wouldn't be the need for many of the issues we face to this day.


If people were more responsible then we wouldn't face many of the issues of with population.


People would be more responsible if the irresponsible weren't allowed to breed...
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

biscuitnote wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:

So these people will be subject to lives of poverty and hardship due to their limited intelligence but your right its the ethical thing to do.


You are subjecting them to poverty because you're an elitist.
The reality is they don't have to be subject to poverty and hardship simply because of their low intelligence and the children don't have to be unintelligent because their parents are.



Hey I'm actually trying to improve their lot in life. Having children you can't afford strains relationships, finances, and for people who are not going to earn alot over their lifetime it means they will have limited options for leaving poverty. In the long run these kinds of people going child free would help our country economically and the environment.


No, you're trying to end lives.
Since when did being unintelligent imply being poor or bad for the economy? If someone can't do something they pay someone to do it for them, that's how money circulates. If someone were completely incompetent and rich, they could keep many others in employment.
2047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

Sir_jamesalot wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:

So these people will be subject to lives of poverty and hardship due to their limited intelligence but your right its the ethical thing to do.


You are subjecting them to poverty because you're an elitist.
The reality is they don't have to be subject to poverty and hardship simply because of their low intelligence and the children don't have to be unintelligent because their parents are.



Hey I'm actually trying to improve their lot in life. Having children you can't afford strains relationships, finances, and for people who are not going to earn alot over their lifetime it means they will have limited options for leaving poverty. In the long run these kinds of people going child free would help our country economically and the environment.


No, you're trying to end lives. mone to do it for them, that's how money circulates. If someone were completely incompetent and rich, they could keep many others in employment.


If I am to understand you correctly you believe abortion is murder? Also social mobility among the poor is shrinking and throwing children into the mix pretty guarantees them a life of being in the permanent underclass.
14787 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

ComboChrist wrote:

Didn't China allow 2 childs per family just yesterday?

Edit; http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34665539


Because one-child wasn't working, and China is now facing an aging underpopulation in the workplace?
Posted 11/3/15
So, basically, you want to improve their lot in life by taking away the right or privilege to have children? Okay. I see your point.
2047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So, basically, you want to improve their lot in life by taking away the right or privilege to have children? Okay. I see your point.


Your kinda young so i'll cut you some slack. Do you know how expensive raising children is?
Posted 11/3/15

biscuitnote wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So, basically, you want to improve their lot in life by taking away the right or privilege to have children? Okay. I see your point.


Your kinda young so i'll cut you some slack. Do you know how expensive raising children is?


Not really. I'm just pointing out how such a thing will sound to the impoverished. Such an authoritarian measure usually doesn't go well is what I'm guessing.
6969 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
Yea just by reading this thread, you have no idea how economics works.
6969 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
You are right. It does not go well.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15 , edited 11/3/15

Ejanss wrote:


ComboChrist wrote:

Didn't China allow 2 childs per family just yesterday?

Edit; http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34665539


Because one-child wasn't working, and China is now facing an aging underpopulation in the workplace?

Agreed. China's one child policy resulted in an aging workforce with insufficient young workers to take their place. It's also resulted in a male/female imbalance that will have a severe impact on the size of the next generation, even with a two-child policy in place.

On the other hand, before the two-child policy change impacts with workplace, most factories will be fully automated and new factories will be built closer to point-of-consumption as transportation costs before more relevant than labor costs.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/business/china-sets-up-first-unmanned-factory-all-processes-are-operated-by-robots/articleshow/48238331.cms

^^^They went from a workforce of 650 to 60 by fully automating the entire facility. Will be further reducing their workforce to 20.
1379 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
i agree that some genes would be better off not being passed on. but the problem of deciding who decides is an issue that i don't think we are ready to face
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

C0mlink wrote:

i agree that some genes would be better off not being passed on. but the problem of deciding who decides is an issue that i don't think we are ready to face

The United States was the world leader in Eugenics prior to WWII.
16863 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

biscuitnote wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:

I'd rather limit who can have a kid rather than the limit to how many... Some people do not need to reproduce


I vote only super athletes with PhDs can reproduce!


PhDs mean nothing in a war. Only those who are fit for service should reproduce!
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.