I wouldn't go as far as VHEMT, but I think that the population should be reduced for the long term protection of the environment and for sustainable high standards of living.
so how do you propose we reduce the population for the long term protection of the environment and sustainable high standards of living? VHEMT is drastic, but i fail to see anything else I can do to reduce the population. I don't think everyone should stop having kids. I'm not going to have some personal vendetta against them if they coppulate. I just don't plan on it for me.
Well, that's a big question and I'm not entirely sure I could give you a satisfactory answer. While the more widespread use of contraception would help to some degree, voluntary contraception is by its nature disgenic - basically the more responsible people would practice contraception while the less responsible people would not, meaning that the next generation would be less responsible people who would be less likely to practice contraceptions. Unless everybody is sterilized, the fecund will inherent the earth, which is the problem with any sort of voluntary reduction in reproduction.
I think some sort of eugenics program which allowed only the smartest people to have children and even encouraged the brilliant to do so, could be good in a number of ways. The downside is the violation of liberties that such an operation would require and flaws of the government bureaucracies that would administer it.
I had never heard of VHEMT until now so forgive me if I have the idea wrong. Your plan is kind of like the Leftover Crack song that we are breeding too much and should stop?
I find this interesting. I like LOC and the song in question but I am not entirely in agreement with the idea of population decrease. The earth`s problem is how the population lives more than how many people there are. Sure this is a complex problem but not having kids will not solve it. If everybody stopped having kids then eventually the earth would perhaps be better off but I am not sure what the point would be if another species became extinct.
The earth`s problem is how the population lives more than how many people there are.I think this is a fairly common view among many environmentally conscious people. I do find it problematic though, because it implies the necessity to lower humanity's standard of living so that we can continue to have a unsustainably high population that continues to grow. As the population grows, the living standard of each person would thus have to be reduced so as to not overtax the environment or use up too many resources. I would prefer to see the world have a smaller population so that each person would be able to consume a fair amount of resources personally without taxing the environment and also have a reasonable amount of breathing space - including natural areas, animal habitats, and personal property
( ... )
Well the machine or system or whatever you wish to call it would not suddenly change if the earth`s population was suddenly cut in half. The land would still be owned by the few and the people would still be packed into small areas. The system would actually suffer because the economy would be sent downward even more so if there were suddenly less people. Even the people that seemingly offer little or nothing to society produce jobs and therefore help the economy to produce more, which in turn would cause a drastic change if that money(those people) were suddenly not there. Of course a population decrease might seem like the way to go but I think a change to the system and the way that corporations abuse the planet is more important.
i wrote all this a while ago. Some of my established and interesting ideas have morphed, but, eh, that happens with time. I'd like to exchange ideas with you as well. :)
Comments 23
Reply
Reply
I think some sort of eugenics program which allowed only the smartest people to have children and even encouraged the brilliant to do so, could be good in a number of ways. The downside is the violation of liberties that such an operation would require and flaws of the government bureaucracies that would administer it.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
I find this interesting. I like LOC and the song in question but I am not entirely in agreement with the idea of population decrease. The earth`s problem is how the population lives more than how many people there are. Sure this is a complex problem but not having kids will not solve it. If everybody stopped having kids then eventually the earth would perhaps be better off but I am not sure what the point would be if another species became extinct.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I'd like to exchange ideas with you as well. :)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment