|
Post by abacus9900 on Sept 7, 2010 18:30:34 GMT 1
What would be the most effective way to reduce world population short of imposed sanctions?
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 7, 2010 18:37:23 GMT 1
Educate women
Lots of studies have shown that the higher level of education that women have the lower the birthrate in that population.
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Sept 7, 2010 18:56:08 GMT 1
Educate women Lots of studies have shown that the higher level of education that women have the lower the birthrate in that population. Really? I did not know that. Of course, the problem with this is providing the educational resources.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 7, 2010 19:47:58 GMT 1
Ban socialism and accept that wealth creates health and happiness and prevents the need for large families to look after you when you're old. Western capitalist countries generally have a very low birth rate. Third world socialist countries have a very high birth rate. Socialism: the greatest evil of the modern age
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 7, 2010 19:51:05 GMT 1
Mind you, if they resurrected all the prominent socialists of the last century they would make a good fist of lowering the population. Sorry Joanne - half a bottle of Burgundy
|
|
|
Post by gmc on Sept 7, 2010 19:54:38 GMT 1
Tax mosquito nets. Make birth control a condition of all food aid programs.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 7, 2010 20:02:26 GMT 1
The eco-hippies did better than taxing mossie nets, they got DDT banned. Estimated body count - 2 million per year. Marvellous.
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 7, 2010 20:10:11 GMT 1
Ban socialism and accept that wealth creates health and happiness and prevents the need for large families to look after you when you're old. Western capitalist countries generally have a very low birth rate. Third world socialist countries have a very high birth rate. Socialism: the greatest evil of the modern age I agree that Western societies have lower populations but I believe that it is education rather than capitalism is the reason. Even in western countries, it is the better educated that have fewer children on average.
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 7, 2010 20:13:02 GMT 1
The eco-hippies did better than taxing mossie nets, they got DDT banned. Estimated body count - 2 million per year. Marvellous. Those that have looked into this urban myth know that mosquitoes were becoming immune to DDT long before it was banned.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 7, 2010 20:20:00 GMT 1
Could you point me to a socialist country with a low birth rate? And don't talk about China - state control doesn't count - you'd be better off dead. Could you provide some evidence of DDT immunity? Never heard that one before.
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 7, 2010 20:28:50 GMT 1
Could you point me to a socialist country with a low birth rate? And don't talk about China - state control doesn't count - you'd be better off dead. Could you provide some evidence of DDT immunity? Never heard that one before. Can you point to any country with an educated population that has a high birth rate? I'm om Blackberry only at the moment (nearly finished my bottle of wine and am sitting with my feet up) -I'll look up the DDT reference tomorrow
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 7, 2010 20:48:43 GMT 1
Last gasp of a bottle myself Tomorrow it is.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 7, 2010 21:22:31 GMT 1
"What would be the most effective way to reduce world population short of imposed sanctions?"
Do you mean in the Third World, abacus?
Since the family provides the only social security safety net available in the Third World you have to offer an inducement that will make the voluntarily childless independent of the support that would otherwise be provided by their offspring. This means either guaranteed free education to tertiary level or a pension nest egg which will grow enough over their working lifetime to make them independent in old age.
This way you get a reduction in the birth rate and a simultaneous increase in the highly educated sector of the population. They can marry and form families like everyone else, except that their children will be either adopted or the children of relatives. I would have thought that these people would be sought after as mates since they will be higher earners and able to provide for themselves in retirement.
I find it is quasi-racist that some folk assume that every Third World man and woman has some sort of imperative to breed. Give them the opportunity NOT to, and in comfort, and I think there will be plenty of takers for the "snip".
In THIS country, I would offer double the current child allowance for the first child only and take that benefit away altogether if a subsequent child were born.. So the State would be effectively be promoting the one-child family whilst not adopting punitive restrictions. It is not the role of the state to be daddy to nation's children. It is the role of parents to be the mummy and daddy of their kids.
Since the age of the mother at the birth of the first child also has a big impact on overall population growth after a couple or three generations, I would also offer incentives to those people who delayed child bearing until the age of 30 - Perhaps extra state contributions into a pension plan - this could also work in the Third World.
These measures are not in the least draconian. They are purely incentives that the State can offer to encourage people to behave in the appropriate way to reduce population growth.
|
|
|
Post by lazarus on Sept 8, 2010 2:36:37 GMT 1
Educate women Lots of studies have shown that the higher level of education that women have the lower the birthrate in that population. Have to agree, it's all about education and empowerment of women. Educated women tend to be more empowered to make birth control decisions. The analysis confirms that higher education is consistently associated with lower fertility. However, a considerable diversity exists in the magnitude of the gap between upper and lower educational strata and in the strength of the association. In some of the least-developed countries, education might have a positive impact on fertility at the lower end of the educational range. Yet, compared with patterns documented a decade ago, the fertility-enhancing impact of schooling has become increasingly rare. The study also examines the impact of female education on age at marriage, family-size preference, and contraceptive use. It confirms that education enhances women's ability to make reproductive choices. www.jstor.org/pss/2137845Education was a key indicator of women's status. Unmet contraceptive need for women exposed to pregnancy was nearly 25%, but decreased significantly with educational level and paid employment. While empowered women were more likely to use contraception, women's education was a better predictor of “met need” than autonomy, as traditional factors and community influence remain strong. For nearly half the 1,830 women in the study, the husband decided whether contraception was used. Fewer than 1% were using contraception before their first child as women are expected to have a child within the first year of marriage. www.rhm-elsevier.com/article/S0968-8080%2804%2923113-5/abstract
|
|
|
Post by havelock on Sept 8, 2010 9:03:48 GMT 1
Could you provide some evidence of DDT immunity? Never heard that one before. Quick Google of DDT; resitance; mosquitoes throws up lots of references. Here's one that is using the example of DDT resitant mosquitoes to demonstrate how the theory of natural selection works. "DDT-resistant mosquitoes were first detected in India in 1959, and they have increased so rapidly that when a local spray program is begun now, most mosquitoes become resistant in a matter of months rather than years." www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/tutorials/The_theory_of_natural_selection__part_1_13.asp
|
|