First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
Post Reply Why doesn't India control its population
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15 , edited 11/3/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

Abortion can be considered a method of population control. I do suggest that many of you rethink what constitutes population control and why you are against it if you think that the right to bear children is more important that making sure there is enough to go around without driving ourselves to extinction.

Abortion is not what is being discussed as a form of population control. Planned parenting, education and economic sanctions are all far more reliable ways to reduce the birth rate.

Oddly enough, the single most effective form of birth control is education. The more highly educated a societies women, the lower the birth rate. Raise the median education level in 3rd world countries and global population growth would start to stabilize.
27244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 11/3/15 , edited 11/3/15

Dariamus wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

Abortion can be considered a method of population control. I do suggest that many of you rethink what constitutes population control and why you are against it if you think that the right to bear children is more important that making sure there is enough to go around without driving ourselves to extinction.

Abortion is not what is being discussed as a form of population control. Planned parenting, education and economic sanctions are all far more reliable ways to reduce the birth rate.

Oddly enough, the single most effective form of birth control is education. The more highly educated a societies women, the lower the birth rate. Raise the median education level in 3rd world countries and global population growth would start to stabilize.


Some seem to be hinting that all forms of population control are bad. So I thought I'd point it out. I agree with your view.
4733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Chicago, Illinois
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
China is communist, india is not, and one-child policy has ended as of a few days ago, thank god
14947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Massachusetts
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
This is a complicated problem and as the one child policy demonstrates it's not easily controlled. generally curbing high reproductive rates would mean making family planning efforts and contraception as well as education on reproductive health readily available and also promoting trends that make it desirable to have fewer children. Because if you say to a huge swathe of people they aren't allowed to reproduce it tends to backfire spectacularly.
55520 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / 風の山
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
yea but china provides for its people and also cuz its a military country with power to do so.

india is a catacoumbs in that sense, so they couldnt do that even if they wanted to theirs nothing they can do that wont cost them an arm and a leg.

also india and most of the world are adopting contraceptive, slowly but surely.

birthrate is slowing down.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

wolfsaiga wrote:also india and most of the world are adopting contraceptive, slowly but surely.

birthrate is slowing down.

India is using cut rate doctors in barely functional mobile facilities to sterilize women in rural areas. While nominally voluntary, there have been significant health issues resulting from secondary infections and a lack of aftercare.

10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
Even if it would be in the country's best interests, enforcing a law like that is basically taking away people's free will.
16757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

C0mlink wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


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!


Hence super athletes and PhDs we would be unstoppable within a few generations.


They would be too worried about their lives to effectively charge a machine gun. Need people with less concern about their own lives.


so we are going to leave the future of man kind in people who don't care about surviving? that is a great plan, why don't we just shoot ourselves. it would be quicker and produce the same results.


If you are worried about your life you will never charge that machine gun and slowly be picked off one and die anyways. If you assault it some will die but some will live and you can push the enemy back. You would be cowering in a trench slowly dying of attrition like what happened in WW1. The only way to win is to attack. You can shoot yourself but then you are a coward.
runec 
28248 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

Mugen417 wrote:
because government social engineering doesn't work... ever....


Er, it does and has literally for hundreds of years.
13899 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / US
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
Poor rural areas depend on children in the family for a labor force so I assume that's part of the reason. Also enforcing and enacting a policy like that is an expensive and daunting task that a country like india cant properly handle right now.
runec 
28248 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

Rujikin wrote:
If you are worried about your life you will never charge that machine gun and slowly be picked off one and die anyways. If you assault it some will die but some will live and you can push the enemy back. You would be cowering in a trench slowly dying of attrition like what happened in WW1. The only way to win is to attack. You can shoot yourself but then you are a coward.


The PHDs have already ensured you won't have to charge that machine gun in the first place.

No modern military would put its troops into a "Hey if we all run into certain death some of us will survive!" situation in the first place. This isn't the 1940s and we don't need to retake France. Also, why are we benchmarking the future of the human race on the biggest soldiers? We are, historically speaking, in the most peaceful time in recorded history.

Posted 11/3/15
because india big
runec 
28248 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

HoldenSamuel wrote:
Poor rural areas depend on children in the family for a labor force so I assume that's part of the reason. Also enforcing and enacting a policy like that is an expensive and daunting task that a country like india cant properly handle right now.


Not exactly. Its sort of a three fold problem. They have the same problem as China where a son is seen as more valuable than a daughter. Then they have poverty, lack of education and lack of access to birth control. Then they have, well, to put it bluntly a lot of underage marriage. 45% of girls in India are married before they're 18. This extends the childbearing years leading to more children per woman.

For example the average age that a woman has her first child in the US is 26 ( which in itself is on the lower end of developed nations ). In India 22% have their first child before they're 18 and 42% before they're 20. So, marry you off at 13-15, immediately get you pregnant ( so no more going to school for you, etc ) then you're a baby factory for life.

That said, India has already enacted policies to try and combat the situation and they are projected to stabilize their birth/death rates within a few decades if they can stay on track.
13899 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / US
Offline
Posted 11/3/15

runec wrote:


HoldenSamuel wrote:
Poor rural areas depend on children in the family for a labor force so I assume that's part of the reason. Also enforcing and enacting a policy like that is an expensive and daunting task that a country like india cant properly handle right now.


Not exactly. Its sort of a three fold problem. They have the same problem as China where a son is seen as more valuable than a daughter. Then they have poverty, lack of education and lack of access to birth control. Then they have, well, to put it bluntly a lot of underage marriage. 45% of girls in India are married before they're 18. This extends the childbearing years leading to more children per woman.

For example the average age that a woman has her first child in the US is 26 ( which in itself is on the lower end of developed nations ). In India 22% have their first child before they're 18 and 42% before they're 20. So, marry you off at 13-15, immediately get you pregnant ( so no more going to school for you, etc ) then you're a baby factory for life.

That said, India has already enacted policies to try and combat the situation and they are projected to stabilize their birth/death rates within a few decades if they can stay on track.


Hmmm, it also including a cultural aspect makes sense and I didn't know that they have already enacted policies which is good for them, (really need to be more involved regarding world events/ news)
4458 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
n/a
Offline
Posted 11/3/15
probably some kind of religious perspective in India.. they don't do anything about the population because it's probably God's will or something like that i.e. "if God didm't want that child to happen that child won't happen.." forget about logic
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.