Reply With Quote
I hope he gets a million or so letters saying he should move to China.
Ted Turner Wants World to Adopt One-Child Policy - What's at Stake?
http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.a...81474978769357
Ted Turner, himself a father of five, wants the world to adopt the same one-child policy currently in place in China. Turner’s reasoning: He believes we need to slow population growth to preserve the human species.
Turner spoke at a climate conference on Sunday, and said, “If we’re going to be here…5,000 years from now, we’re not going to do it with seven billion people.” He went on further to say that those who don’t wish to procreate can sell their fertility rights to those who want to have more than one child. (human cap and trade)
This is not the first time that Ted Turner has advocated limiting the number of children families are allowed to have. According to the Atlanta Journal-Cons ution, Turner advocated a similar policy two years ago, though he allowed a little more wiggle room. Back in 2008, he was generous enough to offer up a two-child limit rather than a one-child limit.
And, so the battle over the wombs of the world’s women continues. Some groups, primarily religious ones, want women to have as many babies as is humanly possible. Others want women to have freedom to choose their family size. Some groups (again, primarily religious ones) want to outlaw abortion. Others want to keep it safe and legal. Now there is pressure for women to limit how many children they bear.
Who wins in all of this? Marie Claire ran an article in their December issue, spotlighting a Chinese woman who broke China’s one-child law. Her brother-in-law was imprisoned until she “agreed” to a forced sterilization.
According to that article, in the Puning region alone, 9,000 women were forcibly sterilized between April and June of this year; in a process they call “remedial surgery.” The slogan of the “family-planning clinics” where these sterilizations take place is, “Have Fewer Children. Eugenics for a Happy Life, a Happy Family, and a Harmonious Society.”
Notice that it is the women in China who must be sterilized, not the men. For a “harmonious society,” the wombs of the nation’s women must be subjugated. Is this the kind of society we want to become? Is Ted Turner’s goal of worldwide population control worth harming women to achieve?
I hope he gets a million or so letters saying he should move to China.
That'd be sweet. I'd sell my fertility rights in a second.
The US isn't really the problem though. I'm not sure what our population growth is but its not gigantic like other places on earth. In any event, population is probably going to be the biggest problem in the future. AGW has NOTHING on future population problems.
a one troll account policy around here might be nice.
RG posted an article in a thread a while back that, if true, renders Turner's concerns moot.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...n_global_aging
Eventually, the last echoes of the global baby boomers will fade away. Then, because of the continuing fall in birth rates, humans will face the very real prospect that our numbers will fall as fast -- if not faster -- than the rate at which they once grew. Russia's population is already 7 million below what it was in 1991. As for Japan, one expert has calculated that the very last Japanese baby will be born in the year 2959, assuming the country's low fertility rate of 1.25 children per woman continues unchanged. Young Austrian women now tell pollsters their ideal family size is less than two children, enough to replace themselves but not their partners. Worldwide, there is a 50 percent chance that the population will be falling by 2070, according to a recent study published in Nature. By 2150, according to one U.N. projection, the global population could be half what it is today.
Had you read this, yet?
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...n_global_aging
Instead of whacky Ted'svision on the subject, maybe if we just stopped allowing more than one child to be exempted on the tax code, and didn't pay women to have illegitimate kids. Make the fathers and mothers responsible for their offspring instead of the tax payer. Remove all financial incentives of having children.
The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate...
--The Population Bomb, by Paul Ehrlich (1968)
Nothing to lose sleep over. Eventually Mother Nature will take care of the population problem.
fascist progressive bull .
It might be a problem, however the right to procreate is not a right that can be infringed by government in America.
Ted needs to stfu.
Bottom line: We need to get comfortable with our own nature...on the whole we are a greedy, selfish, de able, unstoppable species and we WILL overrun the host. Those characteristics are innate, and its not within the bounds of government to save us from ourselves. Only we as individuals can forego rights such as the one at issue.
And that aint happening.
Our time is short.
We have a winner. I'm sick of stupid unemployed people spitting out babies like watermelon seeds because of financial incentives. My daughter knows a girl in her early 20's that has 3 kids from 3 different fathers and lives on child support and government aid. My office is near Fox Tech High School and I see pregnant girls all the time pushing baby buggies with another kid walking by their side taking their kids to the day care at Fox Tech.
The free market solution.
I'll have to give those a read - they look very interesting - but even by 2070 the worlds population is expected to more then double isn't it? It will be interesting to see what kind of stress this puts on the global economy.
You think that most of those people you see are having babies for financial reasons?
You guys make me SMH.
One way or another.
is it just ignorance then? They don't know where babies come from?
That article is taking the UN low projection. The UN high projection shows a much different picture. It would be interesting to see what variables were involved in arriving at those projections but it probably is as simple as a faster decline in the fertility rate.
Lack of sexual education for low income families argument in 3......2......1........
Is Turner aware that a lot of American soldiers are dying overseas?
There is no risk of overpopulation (is that a word?) in the U.S
There are a variety of factors including sexual pressure, ignorance of sexual education, and socio economic situations but there is basically no evidence to support any theory that teen pregnancy is caused in anyway by a desire to get more welfare money.
http://www.psi.org.uk/news/pressrele...ews_item_id=37There was no evidence to suggest that women became pregnant to get council housing or social security benefits. Most of them had known little or nothing about housing policy or benefits before becoming pregnant and the little they had known was usually wrong.
This forum hasn't become predictable at all.
This forum hasn't become predictable at all.
Honestly its because its the truth, but yeah - basically the same arguments have been going on here since forever. We just recycle the .
Honestly its because its the truth, but yeah - basically the same arguments have been going on here since forever. We just recycle the .
Don't get me wrong here, the 'rights' response was just as predictable.
OK, so in other words, it's hopeless because they are just ing stupid...
got it...
I don't know how you got that from what I said but you're welcome to believe what you'd like.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
