Should the US adopt a policy of only allowing a family to have one child?

[LiekOMG]

Its a fact that the population here in the US is growing exponentially, and that in about 30 or so years, the enviornment will no longer be able to sustain us. Every year we add 90 million new people to the worlds population. Soon there won't be enough food to support us, and there won't be enough places to live. As the population increases, pollution increases. We have already run out of places to dump all our garbage, and soon we might end up living in it, which will add to disease. We cannot keep reproducing like bunnies because we will only end up killing ourselves and our enviornment.

China has already adopted such a policy because of the huge overpopulation there. Do we really want to wait until the last minute, until its too late? Should the US government adopt a similar policy now, so that a couple is only allowed to have one child? I am curious what your opinions might be. Please, keep this mature.

 

[erikistired]

yes then my wife would quite bugging me to have another. i tell her one is enough, she says she doesn't want a bratty only child.

 

[StageLeft]

Well apart from the fact that you'd never convince the average US flag waving gun-toting person to go along with such an idea the US is not in the same situation as China. the population will get out of control almost certainly, but if the US did this and artificially kept its population in check it would quite possibly lose some of its momentum on the global stage and, as other countries would continue to grow, the US would find itself number two in time!

Anyway I think a two child policy is fine. One child sucks!

 

[MichaelD]

I don't know about how correct the information about our resources running out is, but I agree with the one child (maybe two) limit.

It bothers me to see these HERDS, not families, HERDS at the grocery store or out at a restaurant. I mean, do you really need a family that big? It's like, they have an infant in a stroller, a toddler, a four year old, a five year old, and eight year old AND she's got another one in the oven....cripes, haven't you ever heard of birth control?

 

[MrBond]

No. There would be no way they can control it, not in a democratic society. The people would NEVER support lawmakers who chose to adopt a policy like this.

Also, I got thinking about something at work today, maybe you can answer it for me. I read in The Bear and the Dragon about how the Chinese government will kill a family's second child if it's born in a hospital. Apparently, they wait until the baby "crowns" (ie: the top part of the head is out), then take a syrienge filled with something (formaldehyde?) and inject it into the baby's brain. If by some chance, the baby gets out and can breathe before they can stop it, they cannot kill the child.

Is that true, or is that just a Tom Clancy fabrication?

 

[Lonyo]

Yeah, then the American population will start to drop

Nah, seriously, most developed countries have very little population growth, some areas of some countries have even seen drops in population. I think that the idea is western countries are pretty much stable at the moment, and might even soon start to lose population, so maybe America coul dwait and see if growth begins to slow of its own accord.


At the moment we're looking at China in geography, specifically its one child policy, and we watched a Video that said on a football feild you could grow enough food for 100 people for a year if it was intensively farmed. Space wise look at South Korea/Japan, developed and have a large population in fairly small space. In the future it will be energy resources that will be the thing to worry about, petrol, gas, coal etc won't last long so that'll be the sort of resource that will run out. Food/space could be dealt with, but it may mean a change in living conditions to those enjoyed by the current generations.

 

[ElFenix]

the native population barely breaks even for births deaths, its all the immigrants that are coming over that are growing the US population.

 

[Martin]

1. There's no need for that yet. The US is far from overpopulated and can easily support more people.

2. You won't be able to enforce it. They have problems enforcing it in China and the government there as A LOT more power than the US government. In order to make it work in the US, you'd have to give the government a lot of power and we know people will not agree to that unless absolutely necessary.

 

[esso]

You made a mistake in your thread title. "US" should read "China" or "India" or "Insert African Nation Here"

 

[Jzero]

Great, then we can have a population with a drastically skewed male:female ratio just like China!

The Earth has its own natural population control mechanisms built-in to it. Areas become overpopulated. Famine and disease break out. Areas become underpopulated.

"The waxing and waning of caribou populations..."

 

[MichaelD]

I guess we won't get into the whole arguement about allowing 12 year old children to have babies, huh?

That's where we REALLY need to crack down...babies having babies is so ridiculous.

BTW, I am a gun-toting, flag-waving American, but I have my own ideas too..

 

[Beau]

No, but breeding licenses would be nice

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: MrBond
No. There would be no way they can control it, not in a democratic society. The people would NEVER support lawmakers who chose to adopt a policy like this.

Also, I got thinking about something at work today, maybe you can answer it for me. I read in The Bear and the Dragon about how the Chinese government will kill a family's second child if it's born in a hospital. Apparently, they wait until the baby "crowns" (ie: the top part of the head is out), then take a syrienge filled with something (formaldehyde?) and inject it into the baby's brain. If by some chance, the baby gets out and can breathe before they can stop it, they cannot kill the child.

Is that true, or is that just a Tom Clancy fabrication?

That book was awesome. As far as I know officially China does not sponsor what you just described, although in reality it does happen. There are forced sterilizations in China as well.

--

It bothers me to see these HERDS, not families, HERDS at the grocery store or out at a restaurant. I mean, do you really need a family that big? It's like, they have an infant in a stroller, a toddler, a four year old, a five year old, and eight year old AND she's got another one in the oven....cripes, haven't you ever heard of birth control?

Yeah it's dickriculous. I saw a guy and his wife and 5 little crotch dumplings at a restaurant one time meet another family that had like 4 kids and for christ's sake, why?

 

[Imdmn04]

Originally posted by: MrBond
No. There would be no way they can control it, not in a democratic society. The people would NEVER support lawmakers who chose to adopt a policy like this.

Also, I got thinking about something at work today, maybe you can answer it for me. I read in The Bear and the Dragon about how the Chinese government will kill a family's second child if it's born in a hospital. Apparently, they wait until the baby "crowns" (ie: the top part of the head is out), then take a syrienge filled with something (formaldehyde?) and inject it into the baby's brain. If by some chance, the baby gets out and can breathe before they can stop it, they cannot kill the child.

Is that true, or is that just a Tom Clancy fabrication?

Tom Clancy full of sh!t propafuvckinganda

 

[Kev]

If Americans could only have one child, how would Southerners procreate?

*rimshot*

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: MrBond
No. There would be no way they can control it, not in a democratic society. The people would NEVER support lawmakers who chose to adopt a policy like this.

Also, I got thinking about something at work today, maybe you can answer it for me. I read in The Bear and the Dragon about how the Chinese government will kill a family's second child if it's born in a hospital. Apparently, they wait until the baby "crowns" (ie: the top part of the head is out), then take a syrienge filled with something (formaldehyde?) and inject it into the baby's brain. If by some chance, the baby gets out and can breathe before they can stop it, they cannot kill the child.

Is that true, or is that just a Tom Clancy fabrication?

That book was awesome. As far as I know officially China does not sponsor what you just described, although in reality it does happen. There are forced sterilizations in China as well.

--

It bothers me to see these HERDS, not families, HERDS at the grocery store or out at a restaurant. I mean, do you really need a family that big? It's like, they have an infant in a stroller, a toddler, a four year old, a five year old, and eight year old AND she's got another one in the oven....cripes, haven't you ever heard of birth control?

Yeah it's dickriculous. I saw a guy and his wife and 5 little crotch dumplings at a restaurant one time meet another family that had like 4 kids and for christ's sake, why?

"Crotch Dumplings?" Ahahahah! ROFLMAOPIMP! That's EXCELLENT! Where the hell'd you get that one?

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: maladroit
If Americans could only have one child, how would Southerners procreate?

*rimshot*

LMAO

 

[StageLeft]

The ideal way to deal with this is education, but history proves that the masses are stupid and, knowing that their own small life makes no difference in the grand scheme of things, continue on with reckless disregard. Get millions of people with the same human mentality and you're back to square one. Government intervention is the only way, and as mentioned, requires a powerful and crappy setup like China has.

--

Crotch dumplings my younger brother uses!

 

[MrBond]

That book was awesome. As far as I know officially China does not sponsor what you just described, although in reality it does happen. There are forced sterilizations in China as well.

So they actually do that, it's just kept very quiet?

Normally I'd dismiss it as bullshit, but Tom Clancy usually bases his books in facts, and if he streaches anything, it's the tech side of things.

I'm not even sure why I was thinking about that at work today, its strange.

Edit: You're not going to see younger kids stop having babies, it's just not as taboo as it used to be. I'd guess in the past it happened just as often, but the idea was so taboo that they either aborted them or kept it very quiet.

 

[GoingUp]

Why don't we just invade Canada? Lots more foot room then for future americans

 

[Dudd]

Every year we add 90 million new people to the worlds population.

So by 2012 we'll have a population of over a billion? I'm sorry, but your math just doesn't add up. What was the latest census numbers, a population of 300 million? That leaves us with 150 million women. So, at any given time, more than half of our women are pregnant? And no one dies? Besides, the birthrate is not skyrocketing. A quick google search found this.

Yes, the US birthrate has just edged up over the necessary replacement level of 2.1, this being due primarily to immigration.

Link

Hardly the population explosion you describe. Besides, it would never work in a free society, it goes against the constitution in so many ways. Good luck getting the ruling Republicans to mandate birth control and/or abortions. Many of them are uncomfortable with sex ed. There are just so many things wrong with this.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: MrBond

That book was awesome. As far as I know officially China does not sponsor what you just described, although in reality it does happen. There are forced sterilizations in China as well.

So they actually do that, it's just kept very quiet?

Normally I'd dismiss it as bullshit, but Tom Clancy usually bases his books in facts, and if he streaches anything, it's the tech side of things.

I'm not even sure why I was thinking about that at work today, its strange.

I don't know how widespread the practice is, but it does happen. A few years back I was reading an article in Time that centered around a baby who was left on the street and people just walked by as this baby corpse was there rotting and it went into the anti-baby situation in China.

 

[LiekOMG]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
1. There's no need for that yet. The US is far from overpopulated and can easily support more people.

2. You won't be able to enforce it. They have problems enforcing it in China and the government there as A LOT more power than the US government. In order to make it work in the US, you'd have to give the government a lot of power and we know people will not agree to that unless absolutely necessary.

No need for that YET. Sure, but do we really want to wait? I don't remember the exact number, but my biology professor said that something like every 10 years the population here in the US doubles. In about 30 years without some kind of limitation, our population would be out of control.
And its easy to say that we wouldn't be able to enforce it. But unless we do SOMETHING, we are going to have HUGE problems in the future.

 

[Shelly21]

Originally posted by: MrBond
No. There would be no way they can control it, not in a democratic society. The people would NEVER support lawmakers who chose to adopt a policy like this.

Also, I got thinking about something at work today, maybe you can answer it for me. I read in The Bear and the Dragon about how the Chinese government will kill a family's second child if it's born in a hospital. Apparently, they wait until the baby "crowns" (ie: the top part of the head is out), then take a syrienge filled with something (formaldehyde?) and inject it into the baby's brain. If by some chance, the baby gets out and can breathe before they can stop it, they cannot kill the child.

Is that true, or is that just a Tom Clancy fabrication?

Don't think that's true.... I think if you have a second child, you loose some 'perks' that you'd normally get versus a family with one child.
Since Chinese people prefer boys over girls, some family would abort the child if they have a girl. In rural areas, there are stories of newborn girls going into the toilet. :disgust:

That explains why boys outnumber girls there....

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

A situation down here (and I assume in most places) is that welfare folks get more money based on how many kids they have.

It's not even worth it for me to build/buy houses that are only 2 bedroom, they gov doesn't pay enough money for small family houses. But you have a house that can support 4+ kids and you get way more.

2 bedroom house (2 kids+1 parent)=$300
3 bedroom house (3 kids+1 parent)=$600
4 bedroom house (4 kids+1 parent)=$800

Those are just roughly off the top of my head

So what incentive do these black single women on welfare have? None. The more babies they pump out the bigger house they get, the more money they get. And the setup is skewed so it's not affordable to rent out a 2 bedroom house. So you have a shortage of 2 bedroom houses. The solution? Instead of increasing the amount landlord's get paid, they just have another baby. Instant boost to another income and living bracket.

It needs serious reform. These people have to quit having so many kids. I hate to allude to poverty breeds poverty, but there is no way these women will ever be able to raise these kids to be successful most of the time. Hell from the ones I've met, many seem to not even care. They're just paying the evil white man rent and it's his fault for keeping them down.