It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The truth about population control?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I would like to remind you that this is located within the Skunkworks section of the ATS Network so this is simply my conspiracy, I'm not a professional.


The purpose people would have many children prior to 1950 was the need for extra help around the home which for girls meant cooking, cleaning and sewing while for the boys this meant working, fixing things and farming. The parents would need extra assistance around the home to so they would have as many children as necessary so that they would not need to hire extra help. Many of the children born during the entire human history prior to 1950 died which also meant parents would need more children as the chances of one or more dying was severely high.

Other than work there were many other reasons for so many children such as there was no entertainment such as television, computer, video games, etc... So when a couple were bored they would have sexual intercourse to entertain themselves. This is still seen today as 9 months after major snowstorms there are large amounts of babies being born.

A third reason was that there were no birth control medication or contraceptives, so every time people would have intercourse the chances of baring a child was very high. Add these three together it leads to a very high rate of child birth and thus population growth.

When the invention of the modern welfare state occurred the need for so many children to keep a family afloat was no longer necessary as the state would step in. The majority of children born were to poor families and these were the very same families that the state would now help. Shortly after the welfare state was created to supplement the need for children the invention of the birth control and contraceptives became available to the public with special programs aimed at poor mothers.

This was said to lower the poverty rate among these young women. At the same time the laws regarding schooling and child labor became more strict leading to children not being permitted to contribute much to the family income which led to many families leaving for urban/suburban areas to find work where children would have good education and the parents would work in the services sector where assistance from children were not necessary.

This same theory very strongly applies to the more Socialized nations of the world which was a leading cause for the sharp drop in population of the Soviet Bloc and other Communist nations. Now the nations of Eastern Europe have a population growth rate in the negatives as they see the need for children to be unnecessary. But this is the same reason why population growth is very high in the more undeveloped nations, they need the children to help them and they don't have easy access to contraceptives/birth control and there are very lax or unenforced laws regarding child labor and regulation.

This leads to two important questions.

1. Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
2. Was this a side effect of a civilized society or was this planned to control the population?

I am providing some links so you can see the current population trends.

Birth Rate
Growth Rate



posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   
BUMP



posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
This is the last time I will give this a bump



posted on Oct, 1 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


I think you are touching a subject at the very tip of the iceberg.

Food additives including but no where near limited to GMO's (Genetically modified organism's), cloned food, vaccinations that are not tested thoroughly enough (accepted version of unexplained side effects) but if they are then it is a deliberate attempt at population control due to the risks created, tea bag flouride content, water flouride content, wealth distibution, wars, sexual education, media influence and many others play a major factor in this topic.

My own opinion is that through all of these factors we have become a world of psychopathic drones and robots cannot procreate.

Theres many human doings but theres far less human beings out there and the worst part of it is that it is now not a matter of intelligence, its almost become chance depending on how lucky you have been depending on all the factors I mentioned above.

Your quite lucky to have even thought of a question like this and I bet your wondering why not many people have posted. You already know why and take some time to analyse it to its fullest too because it might shock you.




edit on 1-10-2010 by XXXN3O because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Most people don't like it but in order to have a perfect world, you would need a massive amount of population control. In a world where life is easy the population will naturally boom. So we either need an unlimited amount of space with resources to sustain an ever inflating population or we would need strict population control. As of right now only one of those options are possible and it's a hard pill to swallow (pun intended). Other than that you're left with a world of fluctuating populations, resources, and calamities. I've heard that the earth has tons of space for us but what about when every person is surviving with a healthy diet and capable of having however many kids they want. It could be 1 it could be 20. Who will take the blame when there is no room left?


edit on 2-10-2010 by ScRuFFy63 because: grammar



new topics

top topics
 
2

log in

join