A few thoughts about the future of this planet
-
When I was born the earths population was 3.5 billion, today it's 7.5 billion, I understand that talking about this elephant in the room is not popular but c'mon here is the real problem and nobody wants to stand up and admit it, nor does anyone have a solution or even dare suggest one.
-
The best solution to get people to go along with (except people like the Taliban) is educating girls, but this is also a tall order in most parts of the world. Also I think governments need to discourage people, somehow, though you can't go making it harder for those that have children. You also need young people in the work force. More open immigraton can help that, but We are supposedly going to deport a big portion of our young work force in this country soon. So who's going to pay the social security?
-
The Chinese have been tackling the population problem for some time now and have only recently been allowing SOME two child families. Why we in europe et al cannot do the same is beyond me. Here in the UK the number of children in a family has been used as a method of acquiring a better council home and more benefits. The need to work has for a long time been negated by this practice which has been allowed to go unchecked by politicians for decades is OUR part in the great lemming race.
-
The Chinese approach was totalitarian and the result was resistance, oppression, and worse. I think it's obvious Europeans would not go along on principle alone. When you are talking about Europe, there is already a much lower birth rate and very different attitudes than China had when they imposed the law.
-
If we can control OUR population growth via education and setting limits on immigration, we can at least do our part. If other nations are unable to control their birth rate there WILL be greater pressure via immigration if we allow this. SOMETHING has to be done before we literally reproduce ourselves into an extinction level event and wars will be part of that.
To do nothing is to state that we are happy to see ourselves evolve out of existence.
-
This is a very so called 'delicate' matter. Its one that we discussed here on the forums before.
I suppose the question should be, why do people have children? This sounds simplistic but nevertheless I feel it should be throughly looked at.
From my perspective there are many reasons. In my case, married at 26, my wife and I waited a little over 2 years before having a baby as the 'nest needed to be feathered'. I, as a typical man, went along with the 'feathering' thinking that I was making things more comfy for both of us.
I feel its women that really pushes for kids. It seems the sexual act for men is all done a dusted in a very short time whereas for the woman its not complete until they deliver a child!
In Ireland over the past twenty years there has been a huge growth in 'single mothers' in many cases having a number of children that they are unable to support and receive no support from either the 'sire' or their family. The State picks up the tab on the child rearing and from what I can gather the 'sire' is not even identified let alone required to support his child.
People can't drive cars without having a driving licence, all for a good reason! Yet they can produce offspring at will with little or no consequences. In fact their standard of living often increases and this can often encourage them to produce more children.
Ireland will shortly be holding a referendum on abortion. I will be voting 'Pro Choice'. In fact I don't believe men should be voting on this issue at all. I'd leave it up to women. If vasectomy was the voting issue I bloody well would not like women having a vote on the matter!
Maybe we should also be thinking about ways of introducing responsible parenthood whereby women are require to get a license before producing children. The main condition could simply be that they can financially support the child or be seen at the time to be able to do so, themselves or with others. And, of course retrospective licenses would be issued as standard if the criteria is met. Not meeting the criteria would mean no State support for the woman or child. State / Public supported charities would have to pick up the slack and I believe this would be the case.
As I said, if you don't have a driving licence you either take a taxi or public transport (if affordable), have someone drive you or walk / cycle (if you have a bike) to where you need to get.
-
I met my wife during the withdrawal of forces from Saudi Arabia at the end of Op granby in 91. Not sure whether or not to blame the various inoculations etc but she developed cancer within a year of getting back. Children were a contentious subject due to the highly religious nature of her family her inability to have children was seen as a message that we should adopt. I was working in the NHS at the time, two or three nights monday to friday on call and three weekends out of four. The MIL (stone) suggested that her daughter and I should adopt several disabled children as part of our duty to her faith. So, I get that faith and social pressure are a driving force and that is before you get to the biological clock and "our friends are having kids" etc. After Sara developed MS kids were just not on the cards but I do not say we need to control population because of jealousy or feeling superior but we must do something. Population increase is going to be the bane of any future this species has and it is taking more and more species to the brink of extinction with us. I do though, admit to feeling pretty brassed off that the numbers of people who have never and probably will never work having massive families on the social with all the things I consider a luxury like Sky television etc and sports without lifting a finger to get them apart from signing on. Perhaps we could start something like a citizenship requirement. Maybe just working for the community to get to qualify. I do not know and this is sounding like a rant or wanting to win an argument but I have to admit the standard of debate is very high and I trust the people I talk to. Feel free to totally ignore what I have said as the delusions of a mind with too much free time.
-
Mike, sorry to hear that about your good lady. I hope you guys are coping and making the best of things.
I agree with what you say about folks on the 'social'. In a way, I also don't blame them for milking a system that is there for the taking.
I imagine the able-bodied out of work recipients would probably moan and groan if required to do a couple of hours community work every day but at the same time it would be for their own good as long-term unemployment is very detrimental to a person's
self-esteem and the longer they are not working the less are the chances of them getting back to work.A 'citizenship requirement' is a great idea and one that would not be that difficult to implement. I think it should be implemented at local community level rather than central (gov) level. One way this kind of idea could be kicked off at a local level is by having allotments with good facilities. An idea might be to turn them into organic produce centres which would cover a broad range of products.
I watched a program on TV this evening, Eco Eye, which investigated the amounts of 'microplastics' in seafood. I won't be eating prawns anytime soon!
Food is one of the three essentials, the other two being, shelter and clothes. If there are dignified ways of having unemployed people growing their own (and others) food this would be a great start.
-
The over-arching issue is the biological drive to have children. It takes a lot to develop attitudes to overcome this. It's not just some notion that goes away easily.
-
Mike Lucey wrote
@unknownuser said:
Oh, hold on! We might be seeing this happening in the USA with The Donald. It will be interesting to see how he handles things. I am not a great fan of the man but he's sorta growing on me.
How is he growing on you now, after just one week?
Agree with his positions and actions so far?
-
@solo said:
Mike Lucey wrote
@unknownuser said:
Oh, hold on! We might be seeing this happening in the USA with The Donald. It will be interesting to see how he handles things. I am not a great fan of the man but he's sorta growing on me.
How is he growing on you now, after just one week?
Agree with his positions and actions so far?
Agreed. Not sure what to say to 45's supporters. But everyone look at the facts (not just "your" facts). Think about it. Be honest with yourself and act accordingly.
-
Mark my words: the next four years will bring chaos, cronyism, amateurism, and a never-ending barrage of so-called 'alternative facts'. And, obviously, bizarre self-aggrandisement. I'm not altogether sure, to put it mildly, that the Trump administration will do American democracy a lot of favours.
I wonder how long it'll take before we see a giant rift forming in the GOP. Surely there must be quite a few Republican politicians already thinking: f*ck, this isn't going to end well, and we'll be held accountable.
-
@solo said:
Mike Lucey wrote
@unknownuser said:
Oh, hold on! We might be seeing this happening in the USA with The Donald. It will be interesting to see how he handles things. I am not a great fan of the man but he's sorta growing on me.
How is he growing on you now, after just one week?
Agree with his positions and actions so far?
No elected (four year period) 'leader' can be fully trusted to do what he/she listed in their campaign unless there is a 'recall' system in place via Direct Democracy.
I've been watching Trump since his announcement to run. Initially, I was amused and then I cringed a little when I heard some of the things he said.
When it came down to Trump v Clinton I wanted to see Trump get there. My hopes are that he will re-open meaningful talks with Russia and China. The last thing we need is WWIII.
Trump is far from polished and definitely not, so called, 'politically correct' but I think he will mix things up sufficiently to satisfy the voters that put him in charge. BTW, Trump outperformed Clinton among white women, winning 53 percent of voters in that demographic.
Trump is also a political 'outsider' and most definitely not over enamored with Wall Street, Big Banks, MNs and Mega Corps. It appears that he may also be immune to cash-in-hand lobbyists which has to be a great start.
I am waiting to see if he fully backs Israel or insists on a compromise or 'deal' as he calls it. It seems to me that Bibi thinks he has a clear run based on his latest incursions into Palestinian territories.
-
@stinkie said:
I wonder how long it'll take before we see a giant rift forming in the GOP. Surely there must be quite a few Republican politicians already thinking: f*ck, this isn't going to end well, and we'll be held accountable.
Fair comment. Trump ran on the Republican ticket but I think he's really an independent and they (GOP) know it.
Over the past 20 years, we, here in Europe, have seen the rise of multiple political parties and coalition governments. I imagine we might also be seeing this happening in the USA. Maybe not such a bad thing as it could be argued that multiple parties in a country's parliament is a more democratic system.
-
On the contrary Trump has his own political correctness (a term originally meaning that you were civil to other people and right wing seemed pissed they were cowed into obliging for some reason--never understood, no one made them) and this is science truth and speech must all fit the politics of his regime. It's alread working in the White House that lies so much the press has decided not to report what they say, and now they are trying to tell the Press and the Public to shut up. Give me a break. The whole anti peace Brexit and hate thing is not going to be the future. Ireland, Mike will not do well to go it alone after the rest of the world has been helping you out. An ethnocentric tantrum will not serve any of the people of the Isles well. No longer protected by a powerful GB, you all will be picked off one by one economically and perhaps politically by all the countries you tick off. Just mho.
-
@mike lucey said:
Trump is also a political 'outsider' and most definitely not over enamored with Wall Street, Big Banks, MNs and Mega Corps.
Er, Mike? Take a look at his administration. Tillerson? Cohn? Mnuchin? Ross?
Edit: Let's not forget, by the way, Trump has enormous debts. The man is owned by 'big banks'. Don't know about anyone else, but I find that a reason for concern. The fact that the Trump administration is now refusing to release Trump's tax returns (despite earlier promises to do so), doesn't exactly ease said concern.
Edit 2:
@mike lucey said:My hopes are that he will re-open meaningful talks with Russia and China. The last thing we need is WWIII.
Right. He'll have to reign Tillerson in first, then. Tillerson, with regards to China's island-building and South China Sea sovereignty claims: "We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed."
The stupidity of that remark is simply breathtaking. If that idiot were my Secretary of State, I'd have him flogged.
-
@pbacot said:
It's already working in the White House that lies so much the press has decided not to report what they say, and now they are trying to tell the Press and the Public to shut up. Give me a break. The whole anti peace Brexit and hate thing is not going to be the future.
In all fairness the press / media had and still have their knives out for Trump. The Reason? All one has to do is look to who owns the media in the USA, five or six people! It would not surprise me if Trump breaks up this one-sided monopoly.
The alternative media (news) is now being hounded.
Media Presstitutes Publish 'Fake News' List To Discredit Alt-Media ...
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/truth-about-fake-news-corporate-mediaMerkel Caught On Hot Mic Requesting “Refugee” Censorship On Facebook.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/09/29/merkel-caught-on-hot-mic-requesting-refugee-censorship-on-facebook/@pbacot said:
Ireland, Mike will not do well to go it alone after the rest of the world has been helping you out. An ethnocentric tantrum will not serve any of the people of the Isles well. No longer protected by a powerful GB, you all will be picked off one by one economically and perhaps politically by all the countries you tick off. Just mho.
When Ireland got into trouble in 2008 it was screwed by Brussels in order to prop up the German and French banks. If Ireland does decide to 'go it alone' all that needs to be done is to take back its territorial waters (10 times the size of the country) and get into the fishing business. A sustainably developed fishing industry could generate 200,000 jobs directly and indirectly. Also unlike the multi-nationals we currently rely on, our fisheries would remain attached to the country.
@stinkie said:
@mike lucey said:
Trump is also a political 'outsider' and most definitely not over enamored with Wall Street, Big Banks, MNs and Mega Corps.
Er, Mike? Take a look at his administration. Tillerson? Cohn? Mnuchin? Ross?
Edit: Let's not forget, by the way, Trump has enormous debts. The man is owned by 'big banks'. Don't know about anyone else, but I find that a reason for concern. The fact that the Trump administration is now refusing to release Trump's tax returns (despite earlier promises to do so), doesn't exactly ease said concern.
Edit 2:
@mike lucey said:My hopes are that he will re-open meaningful talks with Russia and China. The last thing we need is WWIII.
Right. He'll have to reign Tillerson in first, then. Tillerson, with regards to China's island-building and South China Sea sovereignty claims: "We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed."
The stupidity of that remark is simply breathtaking. If that idiot were my Secretary of State, I'd have him flogged.
I have looked at his administration and must admit its a mixed bag. As regards China, the USA does not want to see an alternative to the Petro Dollar and China / Russia and the Brics is a threat. The EU was, but that has been sorted out and put back in its box.
As I said, Trump is practical when it comes to trying to doing a 'deal' and I have faith that he will not get trigger happy. The quicker the World moves to a multi-polar system, all the better.
-
@mike lucey said:
In all fairness the press / media had and still have their knives out for Trump. The Reason? All one has to do is look to who owns the media in the USA, five or six people! It would not surprise me if Trump breaks up this one-sided monopoly.
Mike, honestly! There are more news sources than the major papers. DJT tries to break up media, it won't stop others from reporting.
-
@Andy, Most folks listen to the 'news' that is presented on the TV and don't dig deeper to see if its true or look at the 'news' on the Net from an alternative perspective.
However, I think ordinary folks are now starting to take what is presented on mainstream TV news with a grain of salt and beginning to question things that their gut tells them smells a bit fishy.
My main fear is that the dark side will curtail the Net. This is why we have to be vigilant and protect it at all costs
-
Mike, you want to protect the freedoms of the internet right?
What do you make of this story, there are multiple sources, I posted a mainstream source (however Trump calls them fake news)
Advertisement