0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Go forth and multiply a lot less
The statistics, though, say the UK is below replacement rate.
So what you are actually worried about is the wrong people having more than their fair share.
According to UNICEF "women’s literacy rates in the least developed countries were 70% of those of men. The lack of education and literacy of women correlates with a high birth rate.
With a stable population of 5 million, the UK could be entirely selfsufficient on renewables, with a better standard of living than at present.
Probably, but unsustainable population growth is already affecting the UK, where education and contraception are apparently available to anyone who wants either, but the rate of teenage pregnancy is a serious concern to governments and do-gooders. The trick is to abolish all child benefits and to pay women a comparable sum if they are not pregnant. Say £500 every 6 months from the age of 10 to 60. You get one "bye" after which you lose the benefit permanently if you are pregnant, though it is restored if your child dies before the age of 16. There is a net saving to the exchequer, plus additional tax income from working women not taking maternity leave.
...And that's the reason I suggested genocide. Even if you somehow implement 1 child policy, It will take UK at least 120 years to cut down to 7.5 million population. I don't really think we have enough resources to last for 120 years.
So after losing the benefit, what's the incentive not to have 3?
Old people may have pensions and investments, but that money isn't just sitting in a box under their bed. Its the money produced from some other on going economic activity.
Quote from: cheryl j on 05/05/2015 08:41:14So after losing the benefit, what's the incentive not to have 3? If you can afford to feed, clothe and educate them, why not? But the state won't, and it would be a crime (it already is) to allow them to starve, so you will go to prison. On the other hand if you stop at 0 or 1 you will still receive £1000 per year, which is a fair incentive to do nothing.I'll make an exception for naturally-conceived multiple births: twins and more add fun to everyone's life.
Quote from: cheryl j on 05/05/2015 08:39:18 Old people may have pensions and investments, but that money isn't just sitting in a box under their bed. Its the money produced from some other on going economic activity. True, but that ongoing economic activity is being carried out by the "working fraction", i.e. those between 20 and 60 years old, which increases if the birth rate is below replacement level because the nonworking fraction under 20 is decreasing.
Until that magic number is reached, though, the plan would appear to be that poorer people need to make all the sacrifices so that a select portion of the population can carry on as usual. Don't reproduce, pay a huge portion of your income on energy taxes, and if it's not too much trouble, please kill yourself once you are too old to be exploited in your menial low wage job.
Well, okay, but then those absent under-20s are eventually absent 40 year olds.
but you have to get over that crest gently, where you will have a large number of elderly people dependent on others. Japan seems to be hitting that already. If that bump is too big, you end up with people clamoring for mothers to have more babies, and you are back to square one.
That in turn is expected to harm the pension system and other elements of social welfare. The impact in rural areas is predicted to be especially damaging, putting the very existence of some communities in danger.
just make fewer babies. The downside is that conventional economic indicators such as Gross National Product or average house prices, would fall. So the question is whether you want your children to inherit a better world, or better statistics.
So then what is Japan freaking out about?http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30653825
Experts warn the impact of the decline will harm Japan in various ways.A lowering of the number of people aged between 15 to 64 is predicted to lower potential growth and shrink Japan's GDP.A decline in the population is said by experts to have damaging consequences for Japan