At this point population control is a must
22-25, F
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
But the easiest way to achieve it is not by force.
Rather, provide universal free education and medicine,
and people soon start having fewer kids of their own accord.
The downside is that within 40 years, the world is dealing with an excess of old people and not enough people or funds to look after them.
Thus we also need to make voluntary self-euthanasia legal and available for anyone over 50 who chooses it. As we know from Switzerland's example, it's possible to design legislation to ensure that a person makes their own choice and is not coerced or manipulated.
I know this idea will offend many, especially those who believe in the innate sanctity of human life. However, that ethic evolved in the era of pastoral nomads and early agriculture, when many mothers died in childbirth, and many children never grew to adulthood. People died in tribal and inter-city wars. So they needed stable families and lots of babies to survive as tribes and cultures. These conditions no longer apply.
Nowadays, if humanity and all species of life on Earth are to survive, we must reduce our human population, reduce our material consumption, and end emissions of greenhouse gases, plastic rubbish and pollution.
Rather, provide universal free education and medicine,
and people soon start having fewer kids of their own accord.
The downside is that within 40 years, the world is dealing with an excess of old people and not enough people or funds to look after them.
Thus we also need to make voluntary self-euthanasia legal and available for anyone over 50 who chooses it. As we know from Switzerland's example, it's possible to design legislation to ensure that a person makes their own choice and is not coerced or manipulated.
I know this idea will offend many, especially those who believe in the innate sanctity of human life. However, that ethic evolved in the era of pastoral nomads and early agriculture, when many mothers died in childbirth, and many children never grew to adulthood. People died in tribal and inter-city wars. So they needed stable families and lots of babies to survive as tribes and cultures. These conditions no longer apply.
Nowadays, if humanity and all species of life on Earth are to survive, we must reduce our human population, reduce our material consumption, and end emissions of greenhouse gases, plastic rubbish and pollution.
@Slade I already have the means to take myself out gently
at a time when my quality of life is no longer worth living.
My husband and I chose not to have children.
My parents died (naturally) 54 and 14 years ago.
My younger sister had no children.
I have no living relatives.
Our family is dying out,
and this will be a blessing for the planet.
at a time when my quality of life is no longer worth living.
My husband and I chose not to have children.
My parents died (naturally) 54 and 14 years ago.
My younger sister had no children.
I have no living relatives.
Our family is dying out,
and this will be a blessing for the planet.
BizSuitStacy · M
@hartfire [quote]Thus we also need to make voluntary self-euthanasia legal and available for anyone over 50 who chooses it.[/quote]
So that later, it can be forced on certain people when others deem it's convenient? Your initial comment is pure tripe.
So that later, it can be forced on certain people when others deem it's convenient? Your initial comment is pure tripe.
@BizSuitStacy No, not at all.
That's the whole point of passing legislation to regulate the circumstances and means; to prevent misuse, manipulation, coercion and the opportunistic greed of adult offspring, carers and others.
In general, it starts with an added clause in a person's Advanced Health Directive written while they are still healthy and of sound mind. The individual specifies the kind of treatment they want under each of a range of exact circumstances.
To see a longer and fuller discussion of the issues and ethics, read the chapter on sanctity of life in Peter Singer's book, Practical Ethics.
Euthanasia under strict circumstances and supervision has been available in Switzerland for over forty years. They've had not one instance of abuse, and no social movement to loosen the criteria.
This is not a slippery slope scenario.
That's the whole point of passing legislation to regulate the circumstances and means; to prevent misuse, manipulation, coercion and the opportunistic greed of adult offspring, carers and others.
In general, it starts with an added clause in a person's Advanced Health Directive written while they are still healthy and of sound mind. The individual specifies the kind of treatment they want under each of a range of exact circumstances.
To see a longer and fuller discussion of the issues and ethics, read the chapter on sanctity of life in Peter Singer's book, Practical Ethics.
Euthanasia under strict circumstances and supervision has been available in Switzerland for over forty years. They've had not one instance of abuse, and no social movement to loosen the criteria.
This is not a slippery slope scenario.
BizSuitStacy · M
@hartfire [quote]This is not a slippery slope scenario.[/quote]. Of course it is. The globalists firmly believe the world's population needs to be reduced to 500 million people. Your talking points about free education and health care (neither of which are ever free) fit their narrative perfectly.
Bill Gates claims that with good healthcare, vaccines and reproductive services, the population can be reduced 15%. Funny...those are the types of attributes that lead to an increasing population.
Bill Gates claims that with good healthcare, vaccines and reproductive services, the population can be reduced 15%. Funny...those are the types of attributes that lead to an increasing population.
@BizSuitStacy
Bill Gates is correct and the proof is widely available. He's not plucking a random number from the air. That 15% is based on WHO and other sources of research.
Yes, it might seem as though good healthcare, vaccines and reproductive services might increase the population, but they actually don't.
WHO studies have repeatedly found that when parents can rely on their children growing up and living long enough to care for them in their old age, their immediately choose to have fewer children. Reproductive services include family planning measures such as free access to contraceptives, vasectomies and abortions. Although fertility treatments are possible, they are prohibitively expensive (not possible to offer free), acutely unpleasant to endure, and often unsuccessful.
Around the planet, wherever people get "free" education and medicine, within less than 20 years the rate of population growth drops to zero or just below.
For instance, without adult immigrants, Australia's population has been falling by .5% per year since the 1950s.
I agree that "free" is never free; it does depend on taxes, so it's provided by all workers and business people for the benefit of all. Imagine if businesses could not rely on their staff to be literate and numerate.
I'm not sure what you mean by "globalist".
The trend towards increasing globalism has been running since the 1600 when European explorers began circumnavigating the world and claiming whatever territories they could, by force.
OPEC controls oil prices - and these are not liberals or democratic socialists; their are the biggest mega corporations of capitalism.
Wherever one travels now, shopping centres have the same architecture, decorations and products.
This world has become interdependent via trade - to a degree that would be quite crippling if any large part of it were cut off. The West has, for instance, become grossly over dependent on cheap products and parts from China - to the point of being seriously damaged if trade with China suddenly stopped. That could easily happen if the US and Australia went to war over islands in the international waters of the South China Sea. Yet those islands must remain free if South-East Asian countries are to maintain their sovereignty.
Bill Gates is correct and the proof is widely available. He's not plucking a random number from the air. That 15% is based on WHO and other sources of research.
Yes, it might seem as though good healthcare, vaccines and reproductive services might increase the population, but they actually don't.
WHO studies have repeatedly found that when parents can rely on their children growing up and living long enough to care for them in their old age, their immediately choose to have fewer children. Reproductive services include family planning measures such as free access to contraceptives, vasectomies and abortions. Although fertility treatments are possible, they are prohibitively expensive (not possible to offer free), acutely unpleasant to endure, and often unsuccessful.
Around the planet, wherever people get "free" education and medicine, within less than 20 years the rate of population growth drops to zero or just below.
For instance, without adult immigrants, Australia's population has been falling by .5% per year since the 1950s.
I agree that "free" is never free; it does depend on taxes, so it's provided by all workers and business people for the benefit of all. Imagine if businesses could not rely on their staff to be literate and numerate.
I'm not sure what you mean by "globalist".
The trend towards increasing globalism has been running since the 1600 when European explorers began circumnavigating the world and claiming whatever territories they could, by force.
OPEC controls oil prices - and these are not liberals or democratic socialists; their are the biggest mega corporations of capitalism.
Wherever one travels now, shopping centres have the same architecture, decorations and products.
This world has become interdependent via trade - to a degree that would be quite crippling if any large part of it were cut off. The West has, for instance, become grossly over dependent on cheap products and parts from China - to the point of being seriously damaged if trade with China suddenly stopped. That could easily happen if the US and Australia went to war over islands in the international waters of the South China Sea. Yet those islands must remain free if South-East Asian countries are to maintain their sovereignty.
BizSuitStacy · M
@hartfire [quote]He's not plucking a random number from the air.[/quote]
True. He pulled it out of his ass. Use your head. When has improved health care ever led to a population decline? Hint: it hasn't. It's biologically wired into all living species to procreate. You know...scieeennncceeeeee!
True. He pulled it out of his ass. Use your head. When has improved health care ever led to a population decline? Hint: it hasn't. It's biologically wired into all living species to procreate. You know...scieeennncceeeeee!