Overpopulation and how to stop it

[Veta]

After a post by DoctaSax I though I'd make this thread on the topic of overpopulation ,how can we prevent it .

Is limiting every family to two kids a viable option ? and if the family is against abortion the child to be give to a family that can't have children .

[ChancellorKremlin]

Simple: When the next major epidemic occurs, we just let'er rip.

 

The Greek shall inherit the earth. In the words of Josef Stalin, no man, no problem. 

[LordJerle]

Euthanization and selective breeding :-P Let's start by killing the cast of Jersey Shore and go from there.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

Whenever a child is born, implant a device which suppresses the production of sperm or ovulation. When said children grow up, they must get a license to be allowed to breed, which will allow for normal hormonal processes and breeding, thus insuring that only those licensed can do so.

 

Regular license renewals must be performed, or their breeding, and parental rights, are revoked.

[formel]

Apply simply the first world ecconomical and social structures everywhere and to rise a child gets a real luxury

[nonusnomeni]

day after the 50th birthday put to sleep

 

@formel today that work in civilized and responsible society ie europe, north america where parent can't stand to see own child to be hungry

but in other parts of the world where mr. and miss X have 10 children's and 6 die from starvation and they response on that by making another 10?

[Dude500X]

People are going to continue to breed.

 

We cant stop it really, I also think its unfair to stop it as well.

 

However, countries could come up with incentives to keep a small family instead of a large one?  Much like how some countries have incentives to have large families.

[Captain Cobra]

Eugenics Programs.

[Chbaakal]

Start a worldwide governmental campaign to colonize the moon by 2017. By 2022, use the moon as a jump point to reach Mars with the first wave of terraformation equipment, and begin another migration from Earth via the moon to New Mars in 2030.

 

That's if WW3 doesn't take off in 2014 due to human stupidity. Hmmm...maybe another war will take out about 780,000-1,400,000 people. Unless there's saturation bombing of population centers, which should add another half a million or so.

 

Heeeyyy! If the warlike, hairless apes on this dirtball were really violent enough, we could have Fallout as a reality.

 

YAAAAAYYY! No more overpopulation for a long, long time. Problem solved.

 

 

[Happysparkles]

Simple: When the next major epidemic occurs, we just let'er rip.

 

The Greek shall inherit the earth. In the words of Josef Stalin, no man, no problem. 

 

 

This is pretty much true X_X.

We have "disasters" and Bam Population fixed.

Quite sad though .

 

But I guess a logical approach (Notice it is not a solution)

But killing is not my thing nor forcing, but just trying to teach and spread awareness might help a little.

Very little maybe but every little bit counts.

Unless they find another inhabitable planet (That is empty preferably). But yeah they'd prefer to just kill us off.

A Disaster here, a sickness there, a contaminated vaccine elsewhere. .

 

 

People are going to continue to breed.

 

We cant stop it really, I also think its unfair to stop it as well.

 

However, countries could come up with incentives to keep a small family instead of a large one?  Much like how some countries have incentives to have large families.

 

This is also a pretty neat solution in a sense.

I mean I do not want to get into welfare  ><.

I'll just leave it at, In some places it almost pays to be next to broke and then have a bunch of dependents .

[windpl]

Some of your ideas are making me speechless. You are so cruel

Space is only solution, earth will die soon or later anyway.

And space program research/race could boost economy.

It will happen at some point when breakthrough happen rat race to space will began.

[Dude500X]

we wouldnt have so much babies though if women would just swallow

[Queen Bee]

Whenever a child is born, implant a device which suppresses the production of sperm or ovulation. When said children grow up, they must get a license to be allowed to breed, which will allow for normal hormonal processes and breeding, thus insuring that only those licensed can do so.

 

Regular license renewals must be performed, or their breeding, and parental rights, are revoked.

 

Problem is, who makes that decision? It would be far too easy for people in power to control who gets to have children and who doesn't. Imagine that power in the hands of a rampant racist, or an elitist with a bug up his ass about the poor. Plus there's too much room for the rich to bribe their way into parenthood.

 

 

People are going to continue to breed.

 

We cant stop it really, I also think its unfair to stop it as well.

 

However, countries could come up with incentives to keep a small family instead of a large one?  Much like how some countries have incentives to have large families.

 

A friend of mine suggested a tax on any child after two. He said this not only keeps poor families small, it would increase the size of rich families as it becomes a status symbol for the rich to have a lot of kids ("See how many I can afford?"). Bigger rich families means more wealth distribution when inheritance time rolls around. I think this is shaky logic, but it's an interesting idea.

 

we wouldnt have so much babies though if women would just swallow

I'm doing my part.

[ChancellorKremlin]

Prosperity is the biggest anathema to overpopulation - the richer and more educated people become, the less children they have, and the older they are when they do. A common phenomenon across much of the Western world, as it has also been among the richer classes of society, and this is something that has historically transcended both time and societies everywhere. The poor - farmers, peasants, manual labourers and workers tend to have more children. Just look at developing countries, south and southeast Asia, etc.

 

Ergo, to kill two birds with one stone - aim for prosperity. The rest solves itself. 

[Something]

There has never been a famine in a free society

 

I'll just leave that little tidbit here

[Astaroth-Lite]

Soooooo...is this the official Lover's Lab Misanthropy thread or what?

[Happysparkles]

Prosperity is the biggest anathema to overpopulation - the richer and more educated people become, the less children they have, and the older they are when they do. A common phenomenon across much of the Western world, as it has also been among the richer classes of society, and this is something that has historically transcended both time and societies everywhere. The poor - farmers, peasants, manual labourers and workers tend to have more children. Just look at developing countries, south and southeast Asia, etc.

 

Ergo, to kill two birds with one stone - aim for prosperity. The rest solves itself. 

 

 

This is true, and as I mentioend in another posting is that like it sucks because in some places (like my city) people practically get rewarded for having little and making more babies ><.

 

Sadly these are the same people who buy all their children the expensive clothing and yet not work a single day and brags about it while the rest of us go to work to pay taxes for them to get these benefits that we cannot even get with the little bit we earn ><.

 

Kind of a strange balance going on there. *Coughs* Welfare ><

[Something]

Well Europe is on a trend towards population decline apparently. I personally don't understand why, but the slowing in the rate of population growth apparently means the population growth may go in reverse.

[Emily]

Ban the porn.

[DoctaSax]

Without porn people might start fucking. Not a solution.

[Emily]

...

Now that you mention it.

...

But never underestimate the power of natural disaster and death influence itself though.

 

Sometime even unhappy life itself can be so much worst then death.

 

While being rejected is worst loneliness even in this crowded world of competence, where ppl commit suicides or took others life to fulfill their own purpose.

[Jexsam]

Population control?  Easy.

 

War, pestilence, and natural disaster.

 

Nothing is faster or more effective.  Assuming pestilence and disaster aren't apocalyptic (hyper-contagious disease, large-scale meteor impact, massive solar event, rogue black hole, etc), then the adaptable will survive, and life will, uh, uh, uh, find a way.

 

Every other conceivable method of population control is either easy to abuse or in direct violation of the basic rights of every living thing.  So we're left with two real options; wait for a big kill event, or spread to the stars.  We can only hope the latter comes first.

[Veta]

Well the reason I made this thread was to see viable options in order to prevent war, pestilence or famine so I guess this isn't really taking us somewhere 

[Dee383]

Well The Idea Of You Must Die 1 Day After Your 50th Birthday Means I Only Have Just Over 8 Years To Live .....

And The Other Idea Of Only Allowed To Have 2 Children And If you Have Any More You Must Give Them To Others

Who Cant Have Children , Great Concept But I Dont Know Anybody Who Would Willingly Give Up A Child .....

 

 

 

[Emily]

Speaking of overpopulation there is a bomb in Manhattan. So yeah, it's a crowded world.