Too many kids

[OoerBlah]

So I've just watched Cathy Come Hone, the Ken Loach play from 1965. It's heartbreaking, no doubt about that. But it made me wonder if there is ever a situation where people might think that having kids if you can't afford them is just, well, don't do it?

I know accidents happen and not all kids are planned. I also know that life is complicated and consequences can't be foretold. But particularly in this day and age of so many finding it difficult to find homes and provide for themselves let alone children - is there ever a time when we should say if you can't afford kids, don't have them?

I guess you're a fan of the Holocaust too, then?

Ah, Hedda, it was only a matter of time!

Well post about the positives of mass death and facist population control, its not a surprise, is it?

Maybe not Apple but Blyton was commenting on how "well" China had done and thrn referenced a huge humanitarian crisis as proof. Hardly an ideal go to is it

There are several countries with a lower birth rate than China. For example Germany and Japan. They have lowered their birth rate through good quality education and health services. If you want to stop people in the third world have an excess of children you need to guarantee that their children will survive and elderly people will be supported in old age.

Fertility rates are not reduced by bullying and coercion. China's birth rate is not particularly low inspite if it's in humane one child policy. Ensuring that every child gets a decent education is far more effective for controlling education.

In countries like Nigeria people are not confident their children will survive and they know they need children to look after them in old age. Germans don't have to worry about infant mortality or being fed in old age.

They certainly aren't simpl issues. To ensure 5 in 6 people die (about the numbers the planet can properly sustain) is a very difficult issue. We are presupposing that the planet is better off with humans on it at lal of course. Who is to say a chimp or fox is lesser. Is a planet just covered by insects worse than one covered by humans?

there are also many groups who believe very sincerely that every child prevented from being born is a loss to the planet - look at the Gloriavale videos on youtube, look at the FLDS, look at Orthodox judaism, Islam and all the rest - every birth prevented is a bad thing. Lots of people hold very different views on these issues.

Others see it as a political cause to have many babies - the old plan for Catholics to have lots of babies whilst the Protestants have 1 or 2 in Northern ireland was always to ensure NI became Catholic, ditto some muslims, ditto some orthodox jews in the Israel the state of which they do not recognise. having lots of babies is a very political and religious issue for many groups and peoples.

To ensure 5 in 6 people die (about the numbers the planet can properly sustain) is a very difficult issue.

Obviously 5 in 6 people will die. The difficult issue is how we go about convincing people not to replace them all. Not easy at all when some people are in favour of actually increasing the overall number.

Education shows people opportunities and helps to curb religious extremist tendencies. Lots of very catholic countries like Italy or Portugal have a lower birth rate than the uk.

I don't want anyone to die and this is why the human race must control its population. There are too many children world who die of hunger already. Those of us in developed countries often exasabate the problems of the third world. For example buying cotton that has been picked by children rather than paying a bit more so the children's parents can send their children to school.

Robots are replacing a lot of manual jobs. Physical care of the elderly may well be less of an issue. Meeting the emotional needs of the elderly is more of a challenge.

I don't want anyone to die and this is why the human race must control its population. There are too many children world who die of hunger already. Those of us in developed countries often exasabate the problems of the third world. For example buying cotton that has been picked by children rather than paying a bit more so the children's parents can send their children to school.

Agreed.

Having a child is either an accident or a selfish choice....always. Having 3 children is tripling that selfish choice (or being seriously careless).

I have made that selfish choice...but I don't pretend it was anything but selfish. I wanted a child, so I had one. And every other person using the same NHS I am has to put up with that choice knowing I made it in full knowledge of the fact the NHS is over burdened as it is.

My reproductive choices affect everyone else I share a community with. I do expect others to care about my choice and I expect everyone else to understand that their choices are equally my business too.

We live on a finite resource planet, and no amount of banging on about reproductive 'rights' can change that.

Having a child is always a selfish choice, I'd disagree it's an accident though. Sex can always lead to pregnancy, even sterilisation is not always a guarantee.

There are plenty of ways to reduce the birth rate in the UK without resorting to China's measures. Make people pay from the third birth onwards for labour/birth costs and non life threatening conditions (private healthcare), cease all benefits payable after two children, introduce a financial penalty etc. There are plenty of ideas that could be thought of without actually stopping people. Two is selfish enough, nobody needs more than that.

You can fit the worlds population in the state of Texas. Over population is a myth. The real issue is inequality of resources.

I think it would be a false ecomony and unfair to deny NHS treatment or education to a third born child. Stopping non means tested benefits after 2 children would be doable, but loss of child benefit is unlikely to make a difference. Possibly removing access to childcare vouchers, but then many consider nursery to be education.If children don't get a decent education and health care then they are more like to breed like rabbits when they are adults.

Rather than punishing people we need to look at ways of encouraging people to stop at 2. Germany has a very low birth rate without resorting to punishment.

I often ask myself why my nightmare neighbours have got so many kids.

They don't appear to care much about them and the kids themselves are left to their own devices most of the time. (There is so many awful things I could tell you about this family).

However one thing that the family do seem to enjoy in relation to the kids is the amount of money that enables them to claim.

I heard the mother complaining (loudly) on the phone the other day that "last time we needed more cash we had [child's name] and apparently we haven't got time to have another one now before the law changes [in regards to CTC] unless I get pregnant today and the little fucker [her words NOT mine] comes early".

I mean what a disgusting attitude.

Germany has a very low birth rate without resorting to punishment.

Ok, but let's look at how this is achieved.

First of all, in the former East Germany people didn't want to have children because life there was so bad.

Secondly, after re-unification, taxes were increased considerably to pay for reconstruction of the East. People in the West saw their salaries fall in real terms, while people in the East lost their jobs when communism fell. On both sides this discouraged people from having children.

Thirdly, women in Germany are encouraged to choose between work and family. There is very little daycare available and school hours are very short. Many highly educated women choose to have no children. For example, while it is normal for female academics in the UK to have children, in Germany it is virtually impossible to have children as an academic. It is not good for Germany that so many highly educated couples are choosing not to have children.

There are many more factors as well. Almost all factors could fit under "punishment for having children".

Now look at the economy of Germany. Their current demographics are such that they will have real shortages of workers in many industries over the coming decades. They will not have enough tax being paid to cover the costs of pensioners. This is one of the reasons why Merkel was so keen to welcome highly educated refugees coming from Syria.

We live on a finite resource planet, and no amount of banging on about reproductive 'rights' can change that

Are you somehow suggesting we shouldn't have reproductive "rights"? What form should that take?

And tread carefully, women on this site don't all have those reproductive "rights" you are so disdainful of.

There are finite resources, but a very few of us having more than 2 children doesn't make a whit of difference to that.

It's always been the case of the rich spreading fear of overpopulation while having 5/6 children themselves. The fact is that population can control itself and as Africa and Asia develop population will slowly fall.

As for Europe we are probably going to suffer under population in Russia Italy and southern and Eastern Europe. Basically I am not losing sleep.

To ensure 5 in 6 people die (about the numbers the planet can properly sustain) is a very difficult issue.

That's just crap, what the planet could sustain in 1100s is not the same in 21 st century. The fact is that technology is constantly improving which allows more life to be sustained.

It's often very dark people that say things like we need to reduce population by x amount.

2016Blyton

Are you the the reincarnation of Margret Sanger

It's often very dark people that say things like we need to reduce population by x amount.

You mean like scientists who try to figure out the earth's carrying capacity?

It's true that technology allows for increases in the carrying capacity, but there remains a limit.

It's often very dark people that say things like we need to reduce population by x amount
You mean like scientists who try to figure out the earth's carrying capacity?

No, like facists. Mao, Pol Pot, keyboard warriors on MN.....

Yes a lot of them are dark. My Green Party friend said it would benefit Mother Earth if Ebola wiped out more people.

Why do people like this want people to die, human life is worth more to me than the environment.

Yes it's authoritarians that want to control people's reproductive rights. I am a libertarian so believe it's people choice to have how many kids they want.

Why do people like this want people to die, human life is worth more to me than the environment.

Well, I can't speak for the Green Party - I"m not a member. They're not known for their sanguine views, it's true.

If you were to read the thread, you'd find lots of comments championing the quality of life for existing people over the unfettered production of new ones. Let's look after the people we have here now.

Yes it's authoritarians that want to control people's reproductive rights. I am a libertarian so believe it's people choice to have how many kids they want.

As a libertarian the idea of 11 billion people on the planet must make your blood run cold. Imagine the kinds of government controls that gain traction in the face of dwindling resources.

If you were to read the thread, you'd find lots of comments championing the quality of life for existing people over the unfettered production of new ones. Let's look after the people we have here now

And to look after the people we have here now, we need to make more. You're really not grasping the basics here, are you?