It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Overpopulation: how to control it?

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on May, 1 2005 @ 05:59 PM
Strict Population Control
The time has come to make a radical change. The world’s population is increasing at a swift rate. The world is already overpopulated; there is not and will be enough space or resources for this ever increasing population of ours. There are currently 6.44 billion people sitting on this chunk of earth, 6.44 billion people who need to breathe, eat, drink and defecate. That is 2.8 quadrillion liters of water used per day, 290 million kg of waste defecated per day, 32 trillion liters of oxygen breathed per day, and 720 million kilograms of food eaten per day. Do you think the world will be able to support us in future generations?
But the numbers given where an average, a abstract sum and division between the people that have a lot and those that have nothing. We must first find a way to stop the rapid growth of poverty. Poverty and illiteracy are a growing problem that leads to overpopulation. 30 percent of the world population is currently unemployed, that is 1.9 billion people without a job. 800 million people suffer malnutrition and hunger. And 2.8 billion live with less than 2 dollars per day. These are hard hitting facts. How can we eliminate this?
The world population increases by seventy three million and four hundred and eighty five thousand and eight hundred and ninety seven humans each year. This must stop, the worlds population must decrease dramatically. 64 million people die each year but 1.3 billion are born. This must be inverted somehow. In 1979 Maoist china established the one child policy, where only one child was allowed per couple, this policy helped tremendously to stop the harsh increase in china’s population. A similar policy must be implemented on the rest of the world.
The policy will be as the following, depending on your annual income, and a history of this income, it will be evaluated whether you can have children, and if you can have children, how many you would be able to have. This reasoning is logical, because if someone does not have the money nor ability to take care and sustain a family one should not have a family. Ways to affirm this policy will be mandatory sterilization or legal abortion. Such drastic methods must be employed if we want our children to make it. If this policy is applied poverty and overpopulation will be technically eliminated.
In conclusion, a strict birth bearing policy must be implemented in the world to stop the catastrophic growth of the population.

[edit on 1-5-2005 by LostInAMelody]

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:04 PM
thats why we need WWIII so that 6 billion people can die.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:06 PM
I got an idea.

How about a war

a nuclear war

We need an 80% reduction in population according the NWO fanbois

let's start a war, a nuclear war, at the gay bar gay bar gay bar!


ps: do you have any money? I want to spend all your money....

[edit on 1-5-2005 by Lysergic]

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:11 PM
IMHO, this has been a concern of mine for may years.
Seems to me that too few PTB are willing to make a move, such as China has.
Trojans latex not only prevents pregnancy, but aids as well and they are FREE!
Is there no WAY to prevent 20+ thousand children staving to death each day?

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:14 PM
The need for population control is all hype.

There are vast, and I mean VAST untapped tracts of land in nearly every country.

It's our lifestyle that has to change, not our numbers.

Hydroponics, automation, fish-in-a-barrel, solar energy, concrete dome homes, recycling, these things can provide a cushion for society to prevent the need for a catastrophic crash.

If it happens, I'll be fine with it.

But let's not pretend it HAS to happen.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:18 PM

True that. The worry is what pressures will come to bear on us if we dont move to new techs and changes in lifestyles. The near future doesnt look to bright.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:18 PM
WyrdeOne is right.

Besides, do you honestly think anyone has the right to curtail anyone's reproduction? I think not. It might be being done in China, but it isn't right.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 07:52 PM
Mars is right next door you know
Terraforming any1

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 08:14 PM
I agree that our lifestyle has to change, but such change would be way too radical compared to the proposal of birth control.
Condomns are good in this case, but most of the people do not know how to use them, this may sound funny to you but there are thousands of cases that people did not know how to use the condomn.
War is not the only way.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 08:22 PM
You don't work for the UN do you?
Maybe Warren Buffett?
Overpopulation is or has been alleged to be a myth.


posted on May, 1 2005 @ 08:23 PM
I agree, It's our lifestyles that need the change.

But since you asked:

Limit every couple to one baby, males preffered.
Maybe even abort the female fetus's when they are discovered.

Women 25 and older should have thier tubes tied.
Men 35 and older should only be loaded with blanks.

Allow Aids to flourish throughout Africa.
As long as its contained and isolated it'll be OK.

Only the strong survive, any disabilities...your outta here,
If people live 24 hours pass a deadly accident they are most likely
gonna live...solution, Get rid of Emergency Rooms.

Ok , Im joking,,,all that is just cruel and inhumane.

I agree's all about resources and lifestyle....that's what we should change.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 08:34 PM
For the past few years, the new "tale" has been accepted by males of Africa that if one rapes a virgin, then their aids will be cured..
So, since thay are using as small as 3 month old females to practice on, where is all the aids $$ to teach condom use going?
Who is pocketing all this spare change?

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 08:43 PM
Sorry seekerof I do not work for the UN, I beleive the UN is an organization full of BS and that it cannot do anything, I beleive that organization only exists because someway it is gaining profit, because that is the nature of humans, to win money or gain something out of something. Our lifestyle definetly has to change, and it will change, in a bad or a good way, I hope it's the good way.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 09:10 PM
More people = more consumers = better economy. But only for advanced civilizations. Japan is a great example, the US is another.

Overpopulation is only a concern for the Third World nations.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 09:32 PM

The policy will be as the following, depending on your annual income, and a history of this income, it will be evaluated whether you can have children, and if you can have children, how many you would be able to have.

So only people in wealthy nations wil be able to have kids?
I don't think that'll work too well.
It's the wealthy nations that are consuming the world's resources in the first place.

Although the populations in third world countries are very large they consume less than the US and Western Europe.

If you do want to thin the population, just stop keeping people alive with drugs and surgeries.

That'll bring the death rae closer to the birth rate.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 10:09 PM
If you seriously want to slow global population growth then I suggest the following. End poverty, protect women's rights, increase education levels, make birth control easily available and educate people in it's use, promote monogmous commited relationships.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 10:19 PM
LostInAMelody this population issue is all BS. really.

Just get some up to date data projections and you will see by 2050 the population of the world for most socieies will start rapidly declining.

This doesn't include the massive unreporting of AIDS in Indai, China, Russia, and of course Africa.

Time to move on to the next topic of public hysteria such as peak oil, this one has been beaten by reality.

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 12:17 AM
One way to bring the worlds' population under control is to promote global homosexuality. Pass legislation that would make it easier to "come out of the closet", allow homosexual marriage, outlaw discrimination against homosexuals in the military and the workplace, integrate examples of homosexual lifestyles into elementary school textbooks and actively encourage homosexuality by attacking religions; i.e. Christianity and Islam, that suggest that it is immoral. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, sounds like this population control method is already underway

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 12:40 AM

If you seriously want to slow global population growth then I suggest the following. End poverty, protect women's rights, increase education levels, make birth control easily available and educate people in it's use, promote monogmous commited relationships.

We have a winner!

Granted, it's not as simple as a nuclear war but nothing worth while is ever accomplised easily. We do have to give up certain luxuries (< Key word), but they're just that, luxuries, you CAN live with out them. I''d say it's worth it in order to save the people dying now and to prevent the problems that overpopulation would cause for those of the future.

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 01:12 AM
Delta 38, sounds good. Sex is kind of used as a recreational drug nowadays, and we end up with unwanted kids a lot of times. It's like taking a hit on a drug, and when the rush is over, you are still lonely. Lasting relationships should be a focus for sure. The focus is so wrong in society sometimes, penis pills and such. I think a strong mutual connection with a person is more important than sex.


top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in