Should the poor be discouraged from having children?

It is well-known that prosperity and birth rates tend to be inversely correlated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_birth_rate

The poorest countries tend to be the ones with the highest birth rates, and vice versa. I feel that it is very.. irresponsible for those living in poverty to have many children when they are already struggling to meet the most basic needs for themselves. They will be completely unable to create any savings, and also fail to provide their children with basic education and healthcare, the most important tools their children require to make themselves a better life.

In short, I feel that it is a vicious cycle whereby the poor will keep getting poorer with each generation unless they start having smaller families so they can give their children a viable chance to climb out of poverty.

In some cases having a lot of children can be a good strategy to make sure someone will be able to take care of you in your old days.

Also, the problem doesn't seem to be that the poor have too many children as much as the rich not having enough. High birth rates for the rich, and low birth rates for the poor seems like the safest long-term way of having a healthily big middle class. On the other hand, the rich having few children and the poor many, like we have now, is the best way to make sure all the wealth is concentrated in a few families.

So, I'm rather in favor of things that get the rich to have more kids and the poor less, especially noncoercive ones like tax incentives etc.

Point that somewhere else, or I'll reengage the harmonic tachyon modulator.

Course. the reason why the poor have such higher birthrates is a complete lac k of things like decent sex ed training and or easy access to contraceptives. Not to mention cultural reinforcement of bad ideas like "babies make everything better"

Such as getting a tax credit for having fewer children?

I'm not sure that would be a good idea.

"Why don't you write books people can read?"-Nora Joyce, to her husband James

Unfortunately the poor tend to be the ones who breed most. (Extra hands, more income, etc.)

I'm a skeptical squirrel

Why?

Also, if you're rich, a tax credit for having more children (that could backfire though, it'd need to be very well thought out). You could probably also find other non-tax incentives.

Point that somewhere else, or I'll reengage the harmonic tachyon modulator.

This is not a new idea... It's called eugenics. This is not a very good solution. A much better one, for starters, would be a living wage.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

Or more generally "We shouldn't try to solve problem X because we need to solve problem Y first!!!"

Point that somewhere else, or I'll reengage the harmonic tachyon modulator.

That.

The way to get rid of poor people is to abolish poverty, not to breed them out.

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)

Riight, pointing out the problem (children growing in poverty) is not solved by eugenics and the easiest and most effective method of dealing with the actual problem is to raise the floor, is to is just ignoring a big problem in favor of another.

edited 18th Jul '11 6:59:01 AM by LoveHappiness

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

What evidence do you have for believing that? Any specific historical cases worth mentioning, or any scientifically sound theoretical work showing that?

edited 18th Jul '11 6:55:15 AM by SlightlyEvilDoctor

Point that somewhere else, or I'll reengage the harmonic tachyon modulator.

By definition no one can be in poverty if there is no such thing as poverty. The problem is, how do we abolish it? (or, if you're so inclined, do we abolish it?)

"More well off people" is not the same as "Less poor people".

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)

Here.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

Maybe we're approaching this from the wrong angle. Does overpopulation have anything to do with poverty? It's more accurate to say that our population outnumbers the total jobs available.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

And resources are an infinite thing now? Do you seriously think that poverty and unchecked population growth are not linked? You want to abolish poverty; I also want to abolish poverty. But it is simple economics: The more people there are, the less resources available to each one of them.

This.

I also feel that Midgetsnowman has the right idea. Improved birth control sounds like an achievable step in the right direction.

Merely rewarding people for not having kids doesn't actually change their circumstances in any way, and is therefore likely to be ineffectual, I think.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Well, of course not if "poor" is a relative term. If it's an absolute term, then you could abolish the poor by making sure everyone has X income.

edited 18th Jul '11 7:09:17 AM by Yej

Da Rules excuse all the inaccuracy in the world. Listen to them, not me.

The reason for poverty is not lack of resources. We've had the technology to provide a comfortable lifestyle for every person on Earth for decades.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

Citation needed.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

While that is obviously true, the problem is that resources aren't distributed equally, but on the basis of wealth. I'd argue that if resources were equally available to all regardless of wealth, we wouldn't have the problems we face.

edited 18th Jul '11 7:18:41 AM by TheBatPencil

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)

@Bobby: In a conservation biology class, we pretty much qarrived at that conclusion. The number one reason people have tons of kids is lack of educvation in having a choice, or knowing how to even follow through on such a choice. Its why so many scientists and doctors are in india trying to educate the populace on birth control before their population explodes to the point where starvation is guaranteed.

Here, read this. It's a lot to read but it's very informative.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

I think it's important to bear in mind that when we talk about the ratio of poor people to wealthy people, we are not merely talking about something abstract, but rather a quantity of human individuals. If poverty is bad because it is an unpleasant state to live in, increasing the number of rich people does nothing to make the living conditions of those individuals living in poverty any more pleasant.

@ Yej: Well, "poor" is a relative term, in the sense that in a less wealthy country, standards of living which would be considered below average in modern America can be regarded as wealthy. On the other hand, those people can then compare themselves to the average modern American, and feel resentful.

We can surmise from that that material wealth doesn't correspond directly to happiness. On the other hand, there are certain values by which we can measure wealth more objectively. For instance, human lifespan. It's not difficult to see the relationship between that and the quality of affordable food and healthcare.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

The same people in government who have a vested interest in concentrating wealth to the top also oppose sexual education and distribution of contraceptives, ostensibly for religious/moral reasons.

A cynical person might suspect other motives.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

Yes, although that cynical person might want to consider the fact that such morals and religious views are common among other economic classes as well.

edited 18th Jul '11 7:44:39 AM by BobbyG

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff