Sure if we reverted to a pre-industrial, agrarian society many of the problems wouldn't exist; but do you think that is likely? It doesn't matter than the issue is our current lifestyle, because that will never change, will never revert to the way things were pre-1800's. More people will put a greater strain on the planets ecology than we already do. It will take a major turning point in human history for this to change.
And how about you start minding your own business and stop forcing your weird ideas onto people who have nothing to do with you?
Your Jose Ramirez comment also makes you look totally like someone I'd like to listen to.
I am sure all the "4th child of a family" people would like to have a talk with you. Wonder what they would say if you come up with your abortion idea....
Measures are being taken in wealthy countries that don't have huge population problems. I am well aware that we COULD stop much of the environmental degradation, but only wealthy countries have the ability to do so, and even then most people are only agreeable when it doesn't hurt their pocketbook or inconvenience them. Do you think such steps will happen in Africa before it is too late? India? China(they may get their shit together before some of the others)? Southeast Asia?
As someone above stated, we already have a massive problem with the way to treat our ecosystems. More people will only make this worse.
Liberal fascism, ladies and gentlemen.
If China doesn't serve as an example of why population control is a terrible idea, I don't think anything will.
Furthermore, the whole idea is predicated off the notion that we have overpopulation, which is a total lie. It runs completely opposite to forecasts which show a declining population due to birthrate. Not even the turd-world boom will last forever.
No absolutely not. There should however be a limit to economic benefits from having multiple children. One should not be able to make a career out of child birth. Let's call it...diminishing returns
Education is often the best way to stop people having babies, not just in sex education but giving them wider horizons for careers. They are more often than not less inclined to have a baby before they have made a life for themselves.
Unlike fat spongers who pop out sproggs to keep the money coming in because they have got fuck all else to do.
Not a limit, a license. People should need to get a parenting license before having kids.
Because by saying it's an issue of population control it leaves them off the hook seeing as how noone asks to be born,and noone is seriously proposing a culling of this supposed excess population which may include them. Further, banging the "population out of control" drum, rather than an inefficient consumption and distribution of resources, disavows them off any life style choices. Far better, in their minds, to say "too many people" harming the environment and draining resources rather than "my lifestyle and own actions are the problem". It's a moot issue though, not one person who advocates population control has proposed a sensible framework for it's enforcement, and it's just an abstraction to be waved about to reinforce some vague ideology.
As long you can protect them, no
Why limit it ? If your wife can endure giving birth more than 2, I want 11 as football team (on serious note we will have 2 only)
The only countries with "this kind of population growth" are the ones that aren't going to care/be able to do anything/agree with you. The rest of us need to boost growth. All industrialised nation is at subreplacement fertility rates - the US I think is either the only exception, or only growing due to immigration.