Would you support, open, voluntary depopulation?

reply to post by crimvelvet


Yes, and the need for the labor is real.

I was asked to start doing my share in our orchards and garden acreage at the age of 9. I was not abused nor did I ever consider myself abused. In fact for doing it I was allowed to sell any surplus and sometimes made more than adults. The work was mostly in the Summer and things that I was able to do without problem. Pulling weeds, pruning tree's and picking fruits and vegetables.

As long as the children are being educated and are not abused it is perfectly logical.

Only recently has it reached the point kids are not even expected to mow the lawn anymore. The third world has not yet adopted our strange mentality that kids helping with the chores to put food on the table is a bad thing in any way.

I think in our lazy video game, sit in an office culture we have forgotten what it is like to have to actually do the work. I have lived on my dead end street for 5 years now and have never seen a single teenager doing yard work.

I think we have lost something in all of this. I know we have lost the closeness of the family unit. When the "Village" becomes the parents the traditional family can not survive.

When I sat down to dinner knowing everything on my plate every meal was either grown by us or hunted by us; I took great pride and of course the food tasted extra special. Now 45+ years later I've seen it deteriorate. Close families are disappearing from the scene as we live on top of each other like bees in a hive.

OP,
Sorry for going off topic

The way I see it, we share a planet, and if the human race is to survive we are going to have to make big, big compromises for the common good. I'm not sure about a one-child policy, but I might support a two-child policy. In truth, though, I think that either of these measures would be too little, too late.

reply to post by Blaine91555

When I sat down to dinner knowing everything on my plate every meal was either grown by us or hunted by us; I took great pride and of course the food tasted extra special.

Now 45+ years later I've seen it deteriorate. Close families are disappearing from the scene as we live on top of each other like bees in a hive.

I agree with you. Chores build character and I see that lacking in the young people today that I hire and then have to fire. I mentioned the children working on farms to help explain why large families are not only the norm but necessary in an Ag based society.

It all hangs together.
You have a choice of the type of "energy" that is expended for your culture to "survive" Either you use child and animal labor (energy) and 3/4 of your citizens MUST farm or you use Chemical/Nuclear energy and less than 1% of you citizens farm. These numbers are based on real statistics of today vs a century ago when farming was done with animals.

Actually Energy and not Population is probably the real concern of those in power. How advanced a civilization can become is directly related to its "access to energy" American natives were limited by the lack of a suitable beast of burden. Europe, Asia and the Middle East owe their civilization to the horse,donkey and ox. Look at the incredible advancement the world made once the internal combustion engines were invented -From horse and buggy to space craft in my father's live time!

Cap and Trade does exactly that it puts a Cap on the future of America and Trades our future to China and India, just as Maurice Strong/David Rockefeller planned. I do not know why wrecking the EU and the USA is in the plans of the Bankers/Corporate Cartel but that is clearly what they have planned. Perhaps it is because we have too few young workers left, perhaps the workers do not have the proper "slave mentality" so they are moving on to fresh new countries (India and China) to rape and exploit. Making sure to cripple the old so we can not compete. Perhaps that is why Maurice Strong has left North America to become chief advisor to the Chinese.

"Would you agree to a one child policy? Is it feasible, effective and above all fair? "

Absolutely, 100%! Except it should go by income and ability. FAR TOO MANY people are popping out kids who have no business doing so. No, I am not a communist, a realist.

I am sorry, do you have proof that the elite are planning to wipe out 90% of us? I must have missed it!

Originally posted by Tmd111
"Would you agree to a one child policy? Is it feasible, effective and above all fair? "

Absolutely, 100%! Except it should go by income and ability. FAR TOO MANY people are popping out kids who have no business doing so. No, I am not a communist, a realist.

I am sorry, do you have proof that the elite are planning to wipe out 90% of us? I must have missed it!

NO WAY! The "One Child Policy" has been discussed previously. It creates far too many other problems!

There cannot be any "POLICY" for depopulation. There can only be a reward based system that helps people that "CHOOSE" to not have children. Right now we have the opposite, we reward the people that have kids with more welfare, more foodstamps, Earned Income Credit and tax breaks! We are Rewarding reproduction, and punishing the people that choose not too!

That is exactly why I think all these NWO fantasies of population control are silly! Their actions prove that they want us reproducing! When we see the policies start shifting, then we can begin to worry!

Originally posted by lifecitizen

Originally posted by Hazelnut
reply to post by maus80

 

You may be right and I may be delusional. I still believe that under the right circumstances, people are not hopeless fools and are able to self regulate.

Not saying you are delusional but in a past conversation with you you showed me that you say one thing- and when called on it- say you didnt say it- take that as you will

People are indeed hopeless fools- think Africa where they just keep on breeding when AIDS is so prevelant and there is no food- kids dying of AIDS and starving to death - it doesnt make sense- they just keep bringing more and more children into that mess.

To the OP my answer is NO, I believe one day we will work it out- how to sustain life without bankrupting our planet.

In a past conversation I stated that there is no right and wrong, you called me on it and I explained why I believe that right and wrong are perceptions to which you disagreed. The person who started that thread was reaching out and I responded the best I could. I'm sorry it was not up to your standards.

People are and always have been capable of managing their own lives. Its when governments step in with their one size fits all policies that disrupt the natural flow.

I have 3 daughters, 2 of them are now sterile. The 3rd has taken the gardisil shot, she is 14 and hopefully one day she will be able to become a mother, time will tell. It is no one's right to dictate how and when and who is allowed to reproduce. The right is reserved for the indidvidual. No matter what government policy in implemented to deter that right. That is my opinion.

Every one of you who are advocating reproductive regulation are operating out of fear. Aren't you glad your mother's decided to have you despite the fact the world was already "supposedly" overburdened at the time of your births?

reply to post by Tmd111

Absolutely, 100%! Except it should go by income and ability. FAR TOO MANY people are popping out kids who have no business doing so. No, I am not a communist, a realist.

LOOK at the the numbers I posted, the USA and the EU have birth rates BELOW China with its one kid policy. A rate that is reducing our population to the point we have to import young workers just as the EU must! The nations with high birth rates NEED those kids as unpaid labor!!!

“...as recent as 100 years ago, four-fifth of the world populations lived outside towns and were in some way dependent on agriculture.  Even in 1970's Griggs suggests that half of the worlds working population is still employed in agriculture.” www.historylink101.com...


Please do some research before you believe the DISINFORMATION put out by the banker owned news media.

This is old thinking, you must think criticaly. With technologies and it's possibilities, depopulation is a simple, vulgar solution. This negative way of thinking is just what they want you to do, dont give in to it.

Originally posted by Mandoon
This is old thinking, you must think criticaly.
With technologies and it's possibilities,

you sound like a science fanatic.
Have you even done any research on agricultural technologies?
So far the most eco friendly solution of high productivity and low maintenance be to grow a forest garden. Technology required: clay seedballs and basic plant cloning.

Hydroponics and it's various derivatives have severe environmental impact, low productivity and extremely high maintenance. Only useful for growing plants in place hostile to plants (like basements).

depopulation is a simple, vulgar solution.

If it was so simple, why haven't they done it yet?

The simple solution that I think would be excellent by adding more freedoms to the populace. To make killing humans legal for not just a select few (royalty and government) but for all people.

Really that be where the population problem stems from,
this ideology that homo sapiens are not tasty treats that roast well over a fire.

Due to the confines of the belief system, people think of their life as more than a wink of existence from the perspective of their soul. You as a soul have lived at least millions of years, more likely billions.

Science especially biology has a tendency on making humans into animals, by telling them their only purpose is to eat and reproduce. So as Science be the dominant religion of the masses, do we really need animals in homo sapien bodies?
Animals can be eaten, and hunted when they overpopulate.
That's how we handle deer over populating right?

Same with humans.
Good Idea, it's been done before.

Maybe the government can start issuing permits for hunting humans.

If we make killing just outright legal,that will help to get people out of the cities and back to the land.

Very few people actually enjoy living in cities as it be a highly unnatural environment to be in. A persons social network usually only consists of up to 150 people, in a city due to the extremly fast rate of change these relationships can't be sustained over long periods of time, and so people feel lonely while surrounded by people (i.e. on public transit, or a crowded downtown street).

If people were allowed to kill each other, that would drastically reduce this population clogging in certain areas, there would be less traffic, and everyone would be happier, probably having escaped from the madness of the city with some friends they can now spend lots of time with.

This negative way of thinking is just what they want you to do, dont give in to it.

Oh no! Don't accept things! Accepting things isn't what you would do.
Allowing things to happen!
What? No! we can't allow things to happen.
We must do something, what? nothing!
we must yell "stop" "no" "anti" because we be illustrating our support for what we are against by being aware of it.

If we all say no, anti and stop, we'd all be dead.

Seriously think about it.
Wouldn't it be fun?
Men would be allowed to do the natural protecting the territory instinct.
and Women would be allowed to do the natural being with stable social network instinct.
Can feel satisfied like our DNA designed us to be.

Forest garden social village.
Can move to one now.
Free.

My grandmother, always taught me that "Nature takes care of itself"
usually followed by a thought about the world being overpopulated.

Nature....not HUMAN nature.

The bigger picture that is out there...we don't know what it is.

All the weird weather. Is nature doing a cleanse? Like the big rain that stopped the plague.

Humans interfere in the natural selection by trying to prolong the longevity of people.

We are forefront in the destruction of our environment, and while there is the demand for the destruction it just keeps going.

Originally posted by MissMegs
My grandmother, always taught me that "Nature takes care of itself"
usually followed by a thought about the world being overpopulated.

Nature....not HUMAN nature.

The bigger picture that is out there...we don't know what it is.

All the weird weather. Is nature doing a cleanse? Like the big rain that stopped the plague.

Humans interfere in the natural selection by trying to prolong the longevity of people.

We are forefront in the destruction of our environment, and while there is the demand for the destruction it just keeps going.

I support this,
that's excellent.

the natural way,
the holographic way,
microcosm macrocosm,
as above so below,
like atom like cell like body like village like world.

Well apparently nature doesn't mind us at all then...

Because prior to our numbers we saw global sea level rise 100 meters, before that an ice age, I Comet hit North America in between those 2 periods.

And in actuality, we have been living through one of the most stable climate periods ever and still are.

a bit of melted ice? a Flu? what.... we number over 6 Billion, where we used to have pandemics every decade we haven't seen but 1 this whole century.

People worry about a 1.2 degree temperature shift nature has frozen the whole planet into a ball of ice before...

Obviously Mother Nature barely even cares that we are here this is a slumber compared to what she periodically throws at the planet....

Damn she must have hated the Dinosaurs

90+ percent of the wealth is in the hands of about a dozen families. We should all be rich. If we where, I think we could all afford plenty of food, shelter, etc.. And those that are rich would certainly have plenty and those who don't have plenty can certainly get help from the rich friends and relatives. Where is the need for population control? Besides a high percent of the population don't believe in it. Asking people to volunteer for population reduction is like asking the illegal aliens to volunteer to not invade your country.

Originally posted by ReelView
90+ percent of the wealth is in the hands of about a dozen families.

they create the money on their computers.
even have gold reserves.

We should all be rich. If we where, I think we could all afford plenty of food, shelter, etc..

if we all had money, then who would be slave labouring to attain it?

And those that are rich would certainly have plenty and those who don't have plenty can certainly get help from the rich friends and relatives.

can't eat money, it's just numbers on a computer.
numbers on a computer can be deleted quite easily.

Where is the need for population control?

have you been to Asia, Europe or large cities?

Besides a high percent of the population don't believe in it. Asking people to volunteer for population reduction is like asking the illegal aliens to volunteer to not invade your country.

ya, I think by voluntary it was implied that we volunteer to depopulate someone else.

reply to post by Hazelnut


Yea, me too. Everytime I think of it, I realize, nah, think i'll hang around for awhile and annoy everyone just for the hell of it. The world is in need of my genes anyway.

These are just some of my thoughts.
I think people often forget that we are part of nature and not seperate of it. If nature collapses, we also collapse. The idea that we can just rape the earth as we please shows a lack of maturity and understanding. Understanding these things, we also see that it is not so simple in just simply re-locating populations. Eventually, it'll catch up on you.
I think it is also problematic when we place all our hopes on technology because it seems to me atleast, that if we don't also improve ourselves, this limits the potential of technology and makes us but wild children handling fancy toys.
I think if we want to create a more healthy population, we should begin by living more in balance with the earth. Also we need to improve the standards of living, the rights of women and all and educate.
A major factor in over-population is in poverty, poor rights of women and lack of education.
My thoughts on reproduction in general are, shouldn't we treat it like any other bodily function in life? For are we not tought at a young age to control our bodily functions?
*shrugs*

I wish I had stumbled upon this thread earlier. The one child law is sick sick sick! As an only child my self any parent who would only choose to have one child shouldn't have had any to begin with. I would never wish being an only child on any one. Either have at least 2 or none at all. Having siblings is vital to learning how to get along in society. Its been proven that being an only child stunts emotional growth, interferes with peer relations and other damaging mental side effects.

Only having one child is just wrong.

I persoanlly wouldn't support it, but what we should have is , and what we need to have is a way to kill of all the super super rich that feel that us normal people are 'useless eaters' , get rid of the leaders if they start wars for no good reason like oil and profit.