Sterilization

[cosmickitty]

I believe that sterilizing anyone who is on welfare for a period exceding 3 yrs and a mandatory permit for children would help America's economy more than any of the other BS they're trying to push. It would stop women from becoming baby factories to retain welfare as well as helping to provide better environments for the children being broght into our world.

What is your opinion?

[MetalRenard]

I believe that the future isn't in mandatory sterilization, primarily because of the risk factor and the long term consequences. I believe that people need to be educated, mainly those who believe that religion is their salvation and that contraception is the devil's work.

Wake up people, contraception is good.

[cosmickitty]

Well, not to get into anything graphic, but with the new insert Essure there really isn't much risk involved. There will eventually have to be some population control or we won't have resources to survive. As it stands, if everyone in the world were to live like an average american we'd need 6.5 earth's to provide resources. Personally I'd rather see a few crack mothers unable to pop out kids like rabbits and save my children's future.

[Jacket]

Forcing sterilization to any group of people is as fascist as enforcing it on another group. Telling those, like me, who were helped by welfare for years isn't any different than telling atheists or people who don't have an IQ of 180+, or a boob size smaller than C, or some random ethnicity or religion or social background the same thing.

Might as well enforce a first born male law.

[tnsi]

bu, I disagree. Sterilization is not the answer- The answer is the implementation of a low-wage populous labor social class that takes care of tasks, such as manufacturing. The lack of a low-wage social class is what has put people into positions where they need to resort to underhanded tactics in order to have a comfortable standard of living.

Is this ethical? No. Should it be done? No, but it already is. Instead of using our own people (who are now homeless/barely able to support themselves) for labor, we have shifted our labor to other parts of the world. We fix this problem by fixing the economy, and failing that, there's always eugenics.

[MetalRenard]

There's a problem in what you're saying Cocoa. You're saying that immigration of poorer populations is bad for the economy I think...?
If so then I strongly disagree and history is my example. Our populations never cease to get older (less young people, more old people for those who didn't get it) and that work force, which is willing to do less satisfactory jobs for less money has been a huge benefit for western civilisation. How do you think China's getting so rich now? It's because the people are so much more willing to work. We are simply lazy. I know I am. My first job will earn me around 30 000$ (teaching) but I'm unwilling to work in a job that doesn't pay well. I'm a typical westerner but I'm proud of the fact that we are able to mingle.

Now, back to sterilization, yes I agree, forcing it on people is fascist and extreme.

[Jacket]

Between the 1950's and the 1970's the global birth rate jumped 2.2%. That, when your dealing with a huge number, gives you a big number. Do 2.2% of 6.91 billion and you'll get 152,020,000. Just a bit over 152 million. 152 million more births annually than the previous. However by the time 1990 rolled around we actually went down 1.1%. Course, that's 1.1% of the current rate, which includes that 2.2%. Still, 1.1% isn't bad. Oh, the trend by the way is continuing.

More people are living longer healthier lives. This, unlike Reaganomics, actually has a trickle down effect. Affordable small housing is not going to the youth like it used to. It's much more desirable to have, say, an elderly couple in the neighborhood. Makes selling houses easier. Jobs are being held longer, making it harder to move up the ladder. Jobs are also going to the elderly, which are viewed as more stable and satisfactory workers than the youth. Hell, certain companies *cough*Target*Wallmart*cough* actually went out and hired older people for the specific plan of getting life insurance on them, and collecting it.

There's a reason the average parental age is actually increasing here in the West. There's multiple, and this is one of hundreds of factors. Today's expected age group for parents has risen, because the need to support and care for a child has become more difficult, and requires more time. We're told all the scary stories about teen pregnancies and crackbabies, but they're on the dive. Their dropping. The numbers aren't increasing (actually they are in areas where celibacy and forced parenthood are aggressively or exclusively taught and expected).

Point is, we're birthing less. Much less than we used to just 4 decades ago. We're having less kids now, than when I was born. By 2050 we're expected to have between 7.5 to 10 billion people. 40 years to increase 1 to 4 billion. Not bad when you consider that between 1960 and 2000, another 40 year gap, the global population nearly doubled, going from 3 billion and change to 6 billion and change.

Also interesting of note is that the death rate is increasing. Oh yes, more births = more deaths. Though people are living longer, more are dying every year. It evens out for the older ladies and gentlemen of course, but it leaves the younger world with the same struggle. But it evens out for the young too, they're much less likely to die from natural causes and accidents than they used to. 1 in 10 teens die. Children? Oh you used to have lots of kids, just for the purpose of having an extra around in case one died. You know, seven kids, 5 become teenagers, 3 become adults, 2 marry.

You want less kids born and straining the economy? You're getting it. But what to do with all them elderly, teenagers and toddlers that just refuse to die from influenza like they used to.

That's it, break through. The answer really was in sterilization after all! We just gotta stop sterilizing the inoculation needles. That'll keep the population strain down.

[MetalRenard]

That is the most epic answer ever

[tnsi]

Immigration is not bad for the economy- Outsourcing, however, is bad for the economy in a long-term sense. Outsourcing has the immediate effect of liberating individuals from a comfortable standard of living based upon income, into a situation where they may have to rely on welfare or tricking the welfare system.

This falls back in buprettyinpink's view that there women are constantly producing children in order to continue to make use of the welfare system. People wouldn't really get into this as much if they had access to work.

My views heavily revolved around the lack of work, because that is precisely what I experience, living in Michigan, where outsourcing pretty much wiped the floor with our economy. Car plants moving overseas means that companies that specialize in producing components for cars, companies that once made components and sold those to major car companies, also outsource or close down.

Back to the economy: Outsourcing creates a trickle-out effect. The United States imports much more than it exports. Even though manufacturing jobs outside of the United States are extremely cost efficient, that money is still leaving. The main cause of this stems from individuals who are "unwilling to work in a job that doesn't pay well", yet are demanding reasonable prices. In order to pay individuals well, the company needs to increase prices on things it sells, which makes it harder for individuals to purchase the goods without asking for better pay...etc. etc. rinse. repeat. After a while, WHOA, what is this? Prices are decent, but no one has jobs.

There's a problem in what you're saying Cocoa. You're saying that immigration of poorer populations is bad for the economy I think...?
If so then I strongly disagree and history is my example. Our populations never cease to get older (less young people, more old people for those who didn't get it) and that work force, which is willing to do less satisfactory jobs for less money has been a huge benefit for western civilisation. How do you think China's getting so rich now? It's because the people are so much more willing to work. We are simply lazy. I know I am. My first job will earn me around 30 000$ (teaching) but I'm unwilling to work in a job that doesn't pay well. I'm a typical westerner but I'm proud of the fact that we are able to mingle.

Now, back to sterilization, yes I agree, forcing it on people is fascist and extreme.

The root of the problem lies not within the people. Sterilization solves nothing, since we don't attack the -reason- why individuals might be becoming baby factories. As long as you only attack the effects, it'll continue. Thus, in consideration of the point that we want to deal with humans, what we really need to implement is eugenics.

Being able to freely breed is pretty problematic, no? You'll get all sorts of inbreeding and neglected young. Considering that, why don't we implement an eugenic method of dealing with breeding? I completely agree with the idea for a mandatory child permit, but I feel that such a matter is too weak. I think that the more effective option is to have a mandatory breeding permit. This will make individuals less likely to engage in sex, for pleasure or profit, without making use of proper precautionary tools, or as an alternative, make individuals less likely to have sex at all. Maybe then, America will stop breeding like rabbits.

An eugenic breeding permit would help control the development of humanity as well, and prevent undesirable conditions from tainting the population. Imagine! No AIDS. In addition to the eugenic factor, we should also probably have a certification process that says, "Yes, the individuals here are capable of responsibly breeding and caring for a child.", so one needs to be certified as a parent as well. And we don't even have to worry about people not liking it- They're obviously enemies of mankind's future development if they hate on it. That, and they probably have genetic flaws or a disease they pass down easily.

[Jacket]

If you enforce sterilization you do realize it will breed out of control, right?

Sterilize the poor who abuse the system. Okay, innocent enough right (pfft HA!)? What's next? Sterilizing the mentally and physically handicapped who are likely to pass their handicap down? If dwarfism is considered a handicap, that's going to count. As is hundreds of handicaps that don't actually hurt you - but hey, it's all base and gravy and stock. Extreme? Actually no, look at businesses and political trends. When the authoritative pushes and successfully passes an extreme measure, others follow to tag along. It's how extremental politics work.

Sterilizing or enforcing parental allowance laws is enforcing the right of the government to say "Hey, you. Guess what? Fuck off fucker. Ya tart cunt. We don't want you here." Some people say blacks or latino minorities in urban environments are a bigger strain on the economy than system kids. So... if this is the cure all, what do we do to all the non-whites? Sterilize! We've already started doing it to them dead beat parents. And them retards. Now we'll get those (insert racially sensitive term here).

You go after one group, people will target from the rest. Need proof? Look up the history of eugenics. Your just calling it something else and prancing under an issue, but yeah - first the dead beats, then the handicap, then you.