Should we implement the One-Child Policy in Certain Countries?

As far as I know that's pretty much how it's implemented in China - you get a tax penalty for extra children, and don't get any extra state help.

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

The problem with that is if the poor, for reasons of lower education or whatever, are more likely to have extra kids anyway.

Be not afraid...

Most people don't really want more then one or two kids anyway given family planning.

hashtagsarestupid

Slap an extra tax on per kid and be done with it. Make it big enough, that's a huge incentive to have fewer children then.

"This thread has gone so far south it's surrounded by nesting penguins. " — Madrugada

Pretty much. Fertility rates have been dropping anyway, and I remember a qoute from the BBC about China's OCP:

"Most families here want one child anyway. It's those non-urbanites that want more."

But why bother? The western world is not downing in a tidal wave of people.

hashtagsarestupid

I know that. I'm not advocating a sweep of cities for second-borns. I'm not advocating a OCP here.

Well, Joey Jo Jo, they do say that South-East Queensland in particular is rapidly running out of space, arable land, and water.

Australia seems like a big country, but people only want to live on the coasts. We actually are running out of space, and with that comes the extinction of a lot of our wildlife. They predict the koala will be extinct in 20 years if population growth continues at this rate.

edited 13th Aug '11 2:48:55 AM by LoniJay

Be not afraid...

I can't speak for the koala, but Australia already has a negative birthrate

hashtagsarestupid

Yes, but we have immigration to deal with as well.

Be not afraid...

Immigration is a big problem for Australia. After all, immigrants are urbanites by nature, urbanites live on the coast, and the coast is eroding. And also, there's not much else you can go on the coast, considering there's a couple of literal urban belts on East and West coasts.

And immigrants are young, don't forget.

I think we should have a "one grandparent" rule, that'd help the pensions crisis.

I was more meaning it as a joke, as soon as you have a child one part of the grandparents family has to get killed

edited 13th Aug '11 3:03:03 AM by JosefBugman

i'm not familiar with that rule. I did a search for it and all I found was the icky one drop rule.

hashtagsarestupid

I would advocate a several-child policy to supplement that one-grandparent policy, but euthanisation of grandparents mixed with actively supporting promiscuity wouldn't go well.

That would be ideal, but unrealistic.

What he said.

I'll think of one later

Or you could, you know, implement something drastically easier, less unpopular and more effective, like birth control.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

How about no to any kind of one/few child policies? After all, we're going to need all the soldiers and laborers we can get when the God-Emperor comes and initiates our conquest of the universe.

Try harder Tom. Come up with something funny next time.

^ Am I the only one who thinks there shouldn't be a limit to human population? We're smarter than nature damnit! Our destiny as a species is not constrained to this mudball of a planet and a capped population.

DO NOT MOCK GOD-EMPEROR TOM

Bold caps lock aside, if your aim is to decrease population, murder helps then discourage having children through advertising, encouraging birth control and increased taxes on people having more children *

.

Or, y'know, don't do anything, that's cool.

^ I'd be cool with that if we could move off Earth.

edited 13th Aug '11 7:08:16 AM by AllanAssiduity

^ We've had the technology to do so for 50 years. It's the moronic thinking of "Let's solve our own problems first before venturing out into X". Ever think that in the process of getting to X we'd solve existing problem Y along the way as a side effect?

We saw this happen with the Moon landings. The rise of transistor computers is in part because of that. It solved the age old problem of computers being the size of a football field to do calculations a 1984 calculator could do faster.

There's also the fact that its hugely expensive for very little gain. Over the past 50 years theres been the cold war and other wars to keep us occupied.

edited 13th Aug '11 7:26:10 AM by JosefBugman

This wouldnt work in most countries.

Mostly because most countries with exploding populations have similar problems with implementing it.

Take india. One of the major ways parents ensure their livelihood in their elderly years is having boys to support them. women are a burden that require a dowry to get rid of. One child in india would work about as well as One child did in China. Whats needed is access to birth control and high school level education for the poor of India.

edited 13th Aug '11 7:51:03 AM by Midgetsnowman

Well then, there we go. Really, the way to go is education, free condoms.

I'm just playing devil's advocate really, but I can see others can do that.

The countries that would, in theory, be most in need of such a policy are poor ones, particularly (but not exclusively) those found in Africa, and many of those show little signs of desiring to reduce birth rates. So, how exactly would such a policy be enacted?

I mean, if it's forced on them by "first world" countries, that would spawn endless screams about "cultural imperialism" or somesuch... and the screamers would actually have a point, not just be demonstrating Political Correctness Gone Mad (or at least subject themselves to accusations of same).

Really, though, population control strikes me as something that should be quite far down the list of things to try to fix fucked up situations in poor countries. That, however, is beyond the scope of the subject of this thread, and I'm too lazy to start a new one.

All your safe space are belong to Trump