Thread: SHOULDN'T WE BE SERIOUSLY STOPPING OUR POPULATION GROWTH?

Originally Posted by rammypluge

I have always wanted to live forever, or as long as possible. Its true some or a lot of oldies lose marbles, but some of the keenest wisest minds are amongst them. So i rail against any idea of culling the aged. I would rather see them work a bit, for their own benefit, and the economy if it needs it. If everyone was composted at say aged 40 imagine how immature society could be.

Yeah fair comment. I will admit that I only moved on from being 16yo when I turned 45.

So to avoid the immature society peril - we can still have a 40 year lifespan limitation, just need to move the acceptable age range up from "birth-40yo" to around "20yo-60yo".

Of course we will need to figure out how to get to a place where new additions to the gene pool are not born at such an early age as happens today.

The thing most seem to forget in the population control argument is that if you stop population growth you also crash the very growth capitalist economy that most in wealthy countries such as Australia seem to like. ...The standards of living most want to protect by stopping population growth would collapse anyway in a relatively short time.

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

.... account executives, hairdressers, tired TV producers, insurance salesmen, personnel officers, security guards, public relations executives and management consultants.

And everyone who has had anything to do with so-called reality tv shows!

If your 60 then your likely to have already achieved what you set out to or your unlikely ever to beyond 60.

So just wipe out all the oldies 60 and over.



Let the youth have a chance to screw everything up as generations before them have.

Originally Posted by Zeros

The thing most seem to forget in the population control argument is that if you stop population growth you also crash the very growth capitalist economy that most in wealthy countries such as Australia seem to like. ...The standards of living most want to protect by stopping population growth would collapse anyway in a relatively short time.

The Earth is a finite place so that collapse will have to come at some point in time.

Like it or not so far technology has outpaced population growth.

Originally Posted by Zeros

The thing most seem to forget in the population control argument is that if you stop population growth you also crash the very growth capitalist economy that most in wealthy countries such as Australia seem to like. ...The standards of living most want to protect by stopping population growth would collapse anyway in a relatively short time.

Yes, immigration is estimated to add about 1% to our national growth rate. Witout immigration our population would be shrinking. If our population is shrinking then so is our demand for housing, food, clothing health, education and so much else. Think about how many jobs depend on growth in those industries and how many people would be jobless if demand was shrinking.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Yes, immigration is estimated to add about 1% to our national growth rate. Witout immigration our population would be shrinking. If our population is shrinking then so is our demand for housing, food, clothing health, education and so much else. Think about how many jobs depend on growth in those industries and how many people would be jobless if demand was shrinking.

Indeed. Without the economic imperative, one wouldn’t want do anything as generous as to accept immigrants just because it’s the right thing to do! Or simply because we live in a global world.