Here is a problem
- OK, here is a problem for you anti-breeders. In Australia, you might
say that we are voluntary members. Our population is actually going
down if you look at our birth and death rates. I don't know if this
is similar in the US. BUT - our population is ever increasing
because of migration. I'm not being racist here, in fact most of the
immigrants come from the UK. But it does seem to be defeating the
purpose - when citizens elect voluntarily to keep beeding numbers
down, but the government decides that we need more (to keep fueling
capitalism I guess). What does everyone else think on this subject?
Am I being greedy wanting to keep Australia spacious or should I be
thinking more along the lines of distributing the global burden more
equally? Problem with the last being, I'm not sure the migration out
of overpopulated countries is actually decreasing their
populations...only increasing ours!
- Yes, this is a problem, Loulou. The solution is more complex than
simply building a fence as the US is doing between it and Mexico.
We are told that it's none of our business how many offspring another
country produces. Perhaps so, in which case they need to deal with
their reproductive choices and not export them.
It does no good to improve birth rates to the point that population
density is improving, if the improvement is eliminated by
However, there's another major component in this problem:
exploitation of lesser-industrialized regions by over-industrialized
regions. Both natural and human resources are exploited to feed the
greed of rich regions. Naturally, people will follow the money if
Owners want more higher population density because it serves their
economic interests. Landlords do better if demand is high. Employers
want hungry workers who may be replaced easily. Economic interests of
renters and workers is best served by an improving population
density: lower rents and better bargaining for wages.
Newspapers are owned by those whose interests are served by
increasing our density. So they feed us a steady supply of articles
with the same basic message: fewer workers + aging population =
economic disaster. Their solution: higher retirement age, less
pension, and more breeding.
I don't have an easy answer to this dilemma. On the one hand,
creating zones of martial law along geopolitical boundaries to keep
others out violates human rights. On the other hand, allowing
population density to increase from births or in-migration decreases
quality of life, and could be considered a violation of human rights
The driver of these problems is human breeding, and I do have some
suggestions for amelioration: universal reproductive freedom, end
economic incentives for breeding, and encourage responsible
reproductive choices -- perhaps with rewards. Individually, we can
help by not adding another of us, particularly in regions with high