Ethical Depopulation Could Save the Planet

monckton wrote:
Boy, what a game of cards that would be.
Which poses an ethical dilemma.
If you could travel back in time and play cards with Hitler and Stalin ... would you cheat?

Robertgreene3 wrote:

He has a fear of what he refers to as 'overpopulation' destroying the resources of Earth. He simply has a vague 'solution' that something about 'overpopulation' must be done (but no specific solution, since all of those are ethically incorrect).

Let me ask you this. If you were a paid policy adviser, and you were asked to come up with solutions to deal with overpopulation, that are ethical, what solutions would you recommend?

I rather hear the difference of opinions on the solutions to overpopulation, than only debate on weather or not it exists. If you disagree with a wide-scale vasectomy method, what other ideas do you have, that could be ethical, and get meaningful results?

I want to see links, articles, ideas, and concepts, showing things that are actually being done to fight overpopulation in 2017.

Tim the plumber wrote: How about demanding that the problems with this are actually spelled out?

There are no such problems. Just those who want all those can do types taken away so they don't feel so inadequate.

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed:

litesong wrote: Increase wages securely to low & middle income workers who are the wealth builders of countries, such that they will be able to take care of themselves in old age. Birth rates will automatically come down.

Wages are set by price discovery...the free market.

GasGuzzler wrote:
Robert is simply stuck in his liberal parasite mindset. To him, more population means more parasites and less "resources" for him.

What he doesn't realize is that a percentage of that higher population will come some great people, with great ingenuity, who will do great things. Another percentage of that new population will be highly industrious, creating and building the things that will make his life better. A higher population also has more needs. Needs are not problems, they are opportunities that need to be filled. It's called work. Work equates to wages. Wages created stability....and the more the government...ANY GOVERNMENT...stays out of this free market equation the better. (I will now resist the urge to swerve into a minimum wage stupidity rant)

I hate city living and will never be caught living in one again. However, billions CHOOSE to do so...and there's a good reason for it.

GasGuzzler wrote:
I hate city living and will never be caught living in one again. However, billions CHOOSE to do so...and there's a good reason for it.

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed:

litesong wrote: Increase wages securely to low & middle income workers who are the wealth builders of countries, such that they will be able to take care of themselves in old age. Birth rates will automatically come down.

Wages are set by price discovery...the free market.

Rich people discover they can price labor low, while freely keeping unearned wealth for themselves, when they build sky scrapers tall enough & pay the constables & dictators to run interference against worker bees.

monckton wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:
I hate city living and will never be caught living in one again. However, billions CHOOSE to do so...and there's a good reason for it.

The simple life?

monckton wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:
I hate city living and will never be caught living in one again. However, billions CHOOSE to do so...and there's a good reason for it.

The simple life?

Into the Night wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed:

litesong wrote: Increase wages securely to low & middle income workers who are the wealth builders of countries, such that they will be able to take care of themselves in old age. Birth rates will automatically come down.

Wages are set by price discovery...the free market.

Rich people discover they can price labor low, while freely keeping unearned wealth for themselves, when they build sky scrapers tall enough & pay the constables & dictators to run interference against worker bees.

Nope. The price of labor is the same as any other commodity on the free market. It's price is determined by price discover...a function of the free market.

There is a glut of unskilled labor. It's price is low. It always will be compared to other forms of labor because unskilled labor offers no special feature or skill.

You want to earn more? Gain some skill that people are willing to pay for. Your labor is just another commodity in the free market. You have to make your 'product' better than others out there competing with you.

Wealth is not unearned. People are wealthy because they can perform some service for others that they are willing to pay for. This is true even for Trump.

monckton wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:
I hate city living and will never be caught living in one again. However, billions CHOOSE to do so...and there's a good reason for it.

The simple life?

Robertgreene3 wrote:
The vaccine solution should be considered a crime against humanity. When we refuse to have a public policy on overpopulation, the elite will use their own solutions, and keep it hidden from us. These chemical solutions not only reduce fertility in humans, they reduce the fertility in other animals as well. Even a compulsory vasectomy method is more ethical, than secret chemical solutions that are probably increasing the risk cancer and other side effects. Don't think the elite don't have the power to mess with the food and water supply. When we refuse to allow public conversations on overpopulation, we create a void, where the covert takes place. How do we force mainstream media, to cover the consequences of overpopulation?

Robertgreene3 wrote:
The vaccine solution should be considered a crime against humanity. When we refuse to have a public policy on overpopulation, the elite will use their own solutions, and keep it hidden from us. These chemical solutions not only reduce fertility in humans, they reduce the fertility in other animals as well. Even a compulsory vasectomy method is more ethical, than secret chemical solutions that are probably increasing the risk cancer and other side effects. Don't think the elite don't have the power to mess with the food and water supply. When we refuse to allow public conversations on overpopulation, we create a void, where the covert takes place. How do we force mainstream media, to cover the consequences of overpopulation?

Into the Night wrote: You want to do something about overpopulation?

You first.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote: You want to do something about overpopulation?

You first.

Those that speak of depopulation consider themselves as part of and elite that is above those that should be "depopulated". They are the Nazi's of today and they are the world's new Supermen.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
....we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Into the Night wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed:

litesong wrote: Increase wages securely to low & middle income workers who are the wealth builders of countries, such that they will be able to take care of themselves in old age. Birth rates will automatically come down.

Wages are set by price discovery...the free market.

Rich people discover they can price labor low, while freely keeping unearned wealth for themselves, when they build sky scrapers tall enough & pay the constables & dictators to run interference against worker bees.

Nope. There is a glut of unskilled labor. It's price is low. Wealth is not unearned. People are wealthy because they can perform.... This is true even for Trump.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Wake wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Robert - are you aware that presently in North America that the White Anglo Saxon Protestant and the Irish Catholic/Celtic groups are already reproducing below replacement levels?

The large scale birth rates in the US are from Hispanics who keep large families and blacks who are reproducing because of the results of a poor lifestyle and drugs.

GasGuzzler wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
....we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

As a conservative, I stand personal freedom. That actually includes the right to choose where you live. You may be a fiscal conservative (I doubt it), but your social statements and beliefs are as left wing liberal as it gets.

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Robert - are you aware that presently in North America that the White Anglo Saxon Protestant and the Irish Catholic/Celtic groups are already reproducing below replacement levels?

The large scale birth rates in the US are from Hispanics who keep large families and blacks who are reproducing because of the results of a poor lifestyle and drugs.

Wake,
Then what you're saying is improving the economy and making it more inclusive, right ? Even in Europe the population is dropping. The primary concern is that it shrinks wealth. Republicans love their money. It's like the new U.S. tax bill that passed. The Republicans are trying to repress the average American through economics. We could end up like Brazil if we're not careful.
Yet a healthy economy could be the best thing to happen to environmentalism. That's because more money would be available for research and investment in new, cleaner technology.

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Robert - are you aware that presently in North America that the White Anglo Saxon Protestant and the Irish Catholic/Celtic groups are already reproducing below replacement levels?

The large scale birth rates in the US are from Hispanics who keep large families and blacks who are reproducing because of the results of a poor lifestyle and drugs.

Wake,
Then what you're saying is improving the economy and making it more inclusive, right ? Even in Europe the population is dropping. The primary concern is that it shrinks wealth. Republicans love their money. It's like the new U.S. tax bill that passed. The Republicans are trying to repress the average American through economics. We could end up like Brazil if we're not careful.
Yet a healthy economy could be the best thing to happen to environmentalism. That's because more money would be available for research and investment in new, cleaner technology.

I don't quite get why you would think that not having children in greater numbers would put less money in your pocket. And I'll bet you haven't read the new tax laws so making comments like that is out of line.

What do you think is a "cleaner technology"?

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Robert - are you aware that presently in North America that the White Anglo Saxon Protestant and the Irish Catholic/Celtic groups are already reproducing below replacement levels?

The large scale birth rates in the US are from Hispanics who keep large families and blacks who are reproducing because of the results of a poor lifestyle and drugs.

Wake,
Then what you're saying is improving the economy and making it more inclusive, right ? Even in Europe the population is dropping.

James_ wrote:
The primary concern is that it shrinks wealth.

James_ wrote:
Republicans love their money.

James_ wrote:
It's like the new U.S. tax bill that passed. The Republicans are trying to repress the average American through economics.

James_ wrote:
We could end up like Brazil if we're not careful.

James_ wrote:
Yet a healthy economy could be the best thing to happen to environmentalism.

James_ wrote:
That's because more money would be available for research and investment in new, cleaner technology.

Robertgreene3 wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
....we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

As a conservative, I stand personal freedom. That actually includes the right to choose where you live. You may be a fiscal conservative (I doubt it), but your social statements and beliefs are as left wing liberal as it gets.

I'm what most people would call an extreme fiscal conservative. Extreme because I believe no government has the right to spend any money it doesn't have in times of peace. I think deficit financing is inter-generational theft. I believe the conventional practice of Keynesian economics has failed.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I think we need a balance budget amendment to the constitution, plus requiring all forms of government, Federal, State, or Local, to pay off at least 1% of the outstanding debt per year.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I think if we continue to give the government the power to spend money it doesn't have than there's always going to be abuse.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I also think the courts should have the power to veto all requests for unnecessary spending.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Governments should be required to cut all unnecessary spending until tax revenue exceed spending.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I think we need to redesign the social safety to improve access to jobs and pressure companies to hire the disabled, instead of overusing welfare checks.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I was a liberal until I realized Obama was running a Trillion dollar deficit.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I got so angry, I started listening to conservatives, since they seemed to be the only ones realizing that money doesn't grow on trees.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I'm still socially progressive on helping the poor and disabled,

Robertgreene3 wrote:
but I'm liberal in the sense, we should make sure companies follow the law, pay a decent wage for the work done,

Robertgreene3 wrote:
and provide safe working conditions.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I believe in pragmatic liberalism that doesn't undermine our values, traditions, or undermine the integrity of economy.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Environmentalists believe in protecting the planet for future generations, and conservatives believe in protecting the treasury for future generations.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
The government should have an elite accounting branch, that can help them recognize wasteful spending.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
I believe when there is a problem, the court system should force us to redesign programs to work more efficiently, not increase the budget out of convince.

Robertgreene3 wrote:
You either eliminate wasteful programs or reform to be fiscally responsible.

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:

Robertgreene3 wrote:
Perhaps we can have a public relations campaign about the need to curb population growth in North American Cities. At least increase population in underpopulated areas. In Canada, we could Get people out of Toronto, and move them to Saskatchewan. We should ban immigration to the cities, except for special circumstances.

For those who think I'm against human rights, I don't consider abortion a viable option to reduce population. As a conservative, I think abortion is murder
I'm totally ok with contraception and volunteered vasectomies.

Robert - are you aware that presently in North America that the White Anglo Saxon Protestant and the Irish Catholic/Celtic groups are already reproducing below replacement levels?

The large scale birth rates in the US are from Hispanics who keep large families and blacks who are reproducing because of the results of a poor lifestyle and drugs.

Wake,
Then what you're saying is improving the economy and making it more inclusive, right ? Even in Europe the population is dropping. The primary concern is that it shrinks wealth. Republicans love their money. It's like the new U.S. tax bill that passed. The Republicans are trying to repress the average American through economics. We could end up like Brazil if we're not careful.
Yet a healthy economy could be the best thing to happen to environmentalism. That's because more money would be available for research and investment in new, cleaner technology.

I don't quite get why you would think that not having children in greater numbers would put less money in your pocket. And I'll bet you haven't read the new tax laws so making comments like that is out of line.

What do you think is a "cleaner technology"?

I never said anything about putting money in my pocket. As for cleaner technology I have a few in mind but won't discuss them in here.

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) wake-me-up" wiffed:....pollution is wasting energy and all systems today are being made as efficient as possible.

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) wake-me-up" wiffed:....pollution is wasting energy and all systems today are being made as efficient as possible.

Ah, its nice to hear that european cities don't need to ban ICE vehicles from city streets to save the lives of inner-city children, living near "stop & not go" freeway traffic jams.....NOT!!

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: What are you going to use for force? The phony fear of climate change?

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: What are you going to use for force? The phony fear of climate change?

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" & re-pubic-lick-uns don't act when presented with increasing pollution-related child lung, heart & neurological diseases & deaths. Yes, re-pubic-lick-uns are the way to increase deaths to low & middle classes.