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.

 

Ted Turner urges global one-child policy to save planet

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by InertiaZero
 


Unfortunately, it would probably apply to every peasant, especially if it is enacted under the guise of climate change. I highly doubt that they would apply a policy like this that would only target those on welfare. For one, there would be other politically less-risky policies that could have similar results. For another, even if they say it will target only those who couldn't afford children anyway, we all know that what our politicians tell us and what they do are often two very different things. If we give them an inch, they will certainly take 10 miles. It happens everytime. We can't simply trust that government (or corporate influence) would respect limits or extraeconomic self regulation.

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." --Thomas Paine

I do agree with you that many people who are popping out babies left and right, probably shouldn't be able to do so, especially since we are taking care of those babies, however this should not be left up to government. Government should be very limited in the authority that they have over us, lest we face oppression and tyranny. Government should just but out of the personal affairs of families.

Te reason why there are so many welfare babies, is because people know that their children will be taken care of. So, they either have a ton of kids intentionally, or they don't care enough to make extra-sure that they don't. I'm sure that people would be a lot more careful, if they knew that the responsibility of that child will be solely on them.

Another problem that I often see, is that girls pump out kids, thouh not to milk the government, rather to milk the men that they are trapping. If they get pregnant by multiple men, each one then has to pay full child-support and it's a pretty lucrative venture. On top of this, they get welfare too, as child-support isn't considered income. Some of these women who decide to do this, are usually emotionally immature and have various psychological or personality problems, which often makes the children suffer. These women often make more money out of the gate, than you or I. They will often make much more money than a college-graduate in a good job, so there is very good incentive for popping out babies left and right from different men.

There are several ways in which you can combat this and they all aren't mutually exclusive either. you can educate men on staying away from these predators (which there are many, and not all of them set out to do this), however I don't think that educating young men to avoid the "child-trap" would be very successful as nothing is really going to stop the labido of a 19 year old. You can also set a policy that dictates that women have to spend an equal amount on their children every month from what they get in child support and child support should only be the actual cost of the child, nothing more. For instance, if the child costs $700/month, then the guy should be made to pay only $350 and only if the mother also provides $350 to be spent on the child (rent doesn't count, as rent would have to be paid regardless of the child). However, if the father has shared custody, then he shouldn't have to fork over any money to the mother, as he too has to pay for the child, when he has the child. Giving the mother free-money, which is what a big portion of child support is, is only giving women an incentive to pop out children out of wedlock and sadly, it strips the rights and liberty of many men.

Back to the point. If we allow the government to decide who gets to have more than one child and who doesn't, we are basically enviting in tyranny as the government will abuse that power. What would eventually happen, is that if you are a member of the "elite", you will be able to propagate and if you aren't, well go pile sand.

I think this is a very dangerous proposal, especially by tying it in with "climate change", as many more people would be willing to accept such an anti-liberty policy. I wonder if we should now expect CNN or other ventures to start covertly turning people on to this idea?

--airspoon




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Funny since he has 5 children. Maybe he should practice what he preaches before telling the rest of us what to do to be good little humans.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


The real trick for the media would be to blame this on terrorists too.


Im not sure the environment holds enough weight yet. However, the 'green movement" has really taken off. Not that I disagree with it entirely..but just like the subject we are discussing, there are alot of gray areas.

I agree with you on the child support issue.100%

I also agree with you that women will sometimes trap men. I dont think there is a nefarious league of evil baby making gals out there, but there is some truth to that statement.
I have lived in a military town for quite some time. You see this happen to guys all the time in these towns. They get out of basic, get a girl pregnant, then try to do the right thing and marry her. The military will cover the kid's insurance, he will get BAH pay, she has insurance...the list goes on....
I have unfortunately had the displeasure of some co-workers that have been married to a soldier for a few years. They talk about getting pregnant when he gets home from deployment, and how "the government takes care of everything". Sometimes, these are second and third kids. The girls almost sound proud of the pay increase the husband receives by having babies.

My fiancee served, and said the "ole bait and switch" was common.

Do you think that situation like abusing welfare? At least comparable?

Its a responsibility issue. You cant just have kids for the hell of it. This is a human you become responsible for. Im not responsible enough to have a kid-I have no babies.


Great thread, airspoon!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


This is BS... we could save the worlds environment much quicker simply by encouraging vegetarianism...

Actually, as a culture, we need MORE BABIES!!!!

the west is not producing near as many as it should at this point....



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 



Actually, as a culture, we need MORE BABIES!!!!

the west is not producing near as many as it should at this point....


Quality is certainly better than quantity. I wouldn't go so far as to say that we need more babies. In fact, I do believe that such a notion could be harmful, especially when you have youngsters getting pregnant. Not only does it put a strain on the tax-payer, but it also decreases the odds that those kids having kids won't get an education or contribute to society in a manner that produces a net gain. In other words, they personally will consume more than they produce or spend more than they are capable of bringing in.


This is BS... we could save the worlds environment much quicker simply by encouraging vegetarianism..


I think the best answer is corporate responsibility and accountability. This doesn't necessarily mean more taxes, rather it just means that corporations shouldn't be allowed to get away with half the polluting that they do. Furthermore, we as consumers, along with corporations should be more responsible in how we package goods. Is it really necessary to individually package all goods with as much plastics and cardboards as they do?

I'm not saying that climate change is due to human behavior, but I think most of us can agree that pollution is a problem, regardless of whether it is heating the planet. I'm a nature lover myself and I can't stand the fact that it is hard to find any place that isn't trashed or littered. I can't stand the fact that huge swaths of ocean are floating debris fields, with one being twice the size of Texas.







I don't think anyone wants to either see or deal with this:

















I don't think the answer is to curb births or have everyone refrain from eating meat. In fact, I don't think the answer should inhibit anyone's liberties at all, as it doesn't have to and to be quite frank, it wouldn't matter that much anyway. Instead, the answer is simple and that is to be more responsible, both on the consumer side and the corporate or business side.

Consumers should not buy things that are unnecessarily packaged and business should waste all of that material on over-packaging goods. Over all, people shouldn't litter and instead of financing the invention of weapons that really don't work anyway, we should be funding an inventive solution on how to expose of our trash, so that humans may once again be able to enjoy nature, as "Mother Nature" intended. It probably won't happen in our lifetimes, but maybe future generations would be able to appreciate our sacrifice, just as we appreciate the sacrifices of certain generations that came before us.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm under no illusion that this matter is more pressing than the ultra important issue of our freedoms and extreme danger that is threatening those freedoms, but this issue in of itself poses a threat to our freedom and liberty, as you get idiots like Ted Turner trying to exploit the issue in an apparent effort to take away our freedoms and liberties.




--airspoon


reply to post by InertiaZero
 



I have unfortunately had the displeasure of some co-workers that have been married to a soldier for a few years. They talk about getting pregnant when he gets home from deployment, and how "the government takes care of everything". Sometimes, these are second and third kids. The girls almost sound proud of the pay increase the husband receives by having babies.


Make no mistake about it, these soldiers aren't getting anything for free. Instead, it's part of their benefits package. This is the reason that some joined even. It's not comparable to welfare at all, as these soldiers work very hard for relatively little pay, and these benefits just sweeten the deal a little. In the military, nothing is free, though it may appear that way on first thought. Our soldiers and service-members do work very hard for these benefits though. Ultimately, it's a part of their pay, like health insurance or a company car for a civilian. It's just part of a benefits package and for the most part, it is certainly earned.


Do you think that situation like abusing welfare? At least comparable?


No. See above.

I'm sure however that it is abused by non-military members. For instance, I know that there is a huge problem, acknowledged by the military, where girls will get guys pregnant because of the benefits that they will receive. You know, they intentionally get pregnant, unbeknownst to the guy and then milk it for all it's worth. I know this is a problem because I was required to breif all incoming troops on the problem. There is actually a class on it for all incoming troops (on at least one military base). Quite amusing.


Its a responsibility issue. You cant just have kids for the hell of it. This is a human you become responsible for. Im not responsible enough to have a kid-I have no babies.


I agree, though it shouldn't be left to the government to decide. Instead, it should be left to human nature and Darwin's universe.

--airspoon



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by JewelFlip
Funny since he has 5 children. Maybe he should practice what he preaches before telling the rest of us what to do to be good little humans.



Originally posted by JewelFlip
Funny since he has 5 children. Maybe he should practice what he preaches before telling the rest of us what to do to be good little humans.


Ted is a media pimp with illusions of granduer. What he says applies to only slaves like you and me. While his brood stomps over us all, and creates more broods, we slaves will have to be contend to deliever only one baby each to support their rapacious craving on Earth's resources, which was meant for us equal humans for thousands of years more, as well as our destiny to colonise the stars.

Believe in him, and we will only revert back to barbarism, where the strongest or the richest survive. The rest are only pawn and slaves. This had not been our destiny, but one only sought by the elite to ensure their power and wealth remains only in their hands and never the masses. They only need a few to work the fields and factories, never the responsiblity for the billions of us who will ultimately one day fight for our right and destiny against their lies and duplicities.

This is sadly how our world is governed today - Utilitarianism, totally disregarding how the baby boom led to our flight to the moon, with more children educated performing to the best in every diverse field to advance mankind......



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


Youre right. It's certainly not free.
Thats why it gets me upset that the wives view it as so.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
i hate people like him; and its safe to say he made my hate list.

he has 5 children and has been married 3 times.

before a child who is in junior high school now has a girlfriend and is no longer a virgin he is contemplating secretly about the beauty of a young woman probably the childs peer. while he will probably get the opportunity from some lost woman who is peer to the aforementioned junior high schooler. he wants to use what he has worked for to tell the world that the child in junior high who is still a virgin needs to be mandated to have one child.

hes so ugly i detest his presence and anyone like him. i urge old people like him to be forced to pay more money for the wives they acquire; and urge the cities in which his children live to be urged to consume mercury or flouride or any other eugenics platform.

the world will still be here after his reality isnt; but the sad thing about men like him is he/they is/are worth ruining any other mans reality that contradicts their own personal happiness.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon


Either way, this is ridiculous, as no0body should be able to tell me how many children I can and can't have. I should be able to birth as many children as I can take care of and that's that.

Furthermore, this will only help the elite, who will either disobey this law, as they do seem to be above the law, or they will simply pay through the fines to have more children, as the elite in China did.


And no one should tell you how many wives you can have either!!!!!!!!
edit on 6-12-2010 by RRokkyy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Realize that the only nations that would comply with this are the nations that are already below replacement.

The only nations that would follow this are going to have a DRASTIC population decline over the next 30 years already, as their top heavy population dies off.

Which means - you'd be agreeing to wipe you and your culture off the planet in favour of the groups that don't and will not comply with this.

Because that is all that would happen. We would not have enough children, grandchildren, and eventually that would mean your descendents will be subsumed into the groups that did not comply and will out breed you.

Brilliant. Truly brilliant plan.
edit on 2010/12/6 by Aeons because: (no reason given)

edit on 2010/12/6 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by RRokkyy
 


Are you comparing women to children?



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by RRokkyy
 


Are you comparing women to children?


The only way to have a lot of children is to have a lot of wives.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRokkyy

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by RRokkyy
 


Are you comparing women to children?


The only way to have a lot of children is to have a lot of wives.


If you are a man.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I am Child Free By Choice.

Ted can show the world he's serious by rewarding me with a large sum of money



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
I suggest that everyone rent the movie, "Idiocracy," if they really want understand the gravity of this topic. Although it is meant to be a comedy, I found the first five minutes to be quite scary; mainly because I live in Northern Appalachia and see this kind of thing on a daily basis.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by InertiaZero

This applies to the people who sit on welfare, have no ambition, and refuse to use protection. These children are leverage to get more money, and more security. In some parts of the midwest, it's almost like a third-world country. Children are born, bred into that environment, and grow up to repeat the same process. No education, no ambition, no money and no future.
It's sad. It sounds calloused, I know. But it's also true. People manipulate the system. There is no reason someone who hasnt really been employed in years should be popping out kids ever couple of years.

Putting a cap on the amount of children you have isnt really a solution though. Making people more responsible is the issue.

So, like I said....I agree...but only half.


+1
Its the existence of those people that lead to the raise of one-child policy concern. Its not just America, these selfish people are throughout every corner of Earth. I have heard enough stories of parents not even making enough to feed themselves yet have 5, 6, 7 kids. With the climate change and stuff, we will have food crisis; the world simply cannot accommodate a higher population, which is exponentially increasing at the moment.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
The media/TV Networks CONSTANTLY push sexuality, voyeurism and straight up sick _ !! I don't get it. Even the Disney networks are pushing sexuality on young children.

What could the above possibly bring? A crap-ton of babies, thats what! A whole lot of promiscuous young, and adult people poppin out babies for decades.

Now...the man wants to limits the amount of babies you can have. WTF??!! Im confused.

Somebody please explain this to me?!!
edit on 12/6/2010 by Termite197 because: To shorten



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by nerbot

Originally posted by airspoon
Either way, this is ridiculous, as no0body should be able to tell me how many children I can and can't have. I should be able to birth as many children as I can take care of and that's that.


I agree, with one caveat....Can you take care of them, pay for them, be responsible for them, and stand by your children until they are adults? The future is unpredictable eh?

An easy thing to say, but sh*t CAN hit the fans sometimes and then more than just the parents and kids suffer. Others do too.

As a single and celibate person, WHY do I have to help pay for someone else's kids education. How is that fair?

I propose a written exam for all those wishing to be a parent. Reproduction is easy, responsibility is not.

I have no beef with anyone's wishes to have as many kids as they want, as long as they take responsibility for the world they are helping create.


My thoughts exactly!!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:57 PM
link   
If there was more focus on space research this would not be critical. The world population is expected to increase to a total of 8 - 10.5 billion by the year 2050. The future is in space. There, I said it.

By the way regarding population control. "I'm allowed to have as many kids as I want
" - if things do get that bad that there is overcrowding and more economical issues, i see it as viable. What, you have lost all your other freedoms, this one is next if it comes to be. It would be necessary, you would just be selfish in thinking that you should have 10 kids yet can't feed two of them so you apply for welfare and become a drain on society.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by nerbot
 



I agree, with one caveat....Can you take care of them, pay for them, be responsible for them, and stand by your children until they are adults? The future is unpredictable eh?


Many people, if not most, can and do take care of their children until they are adults and beyond. Just because someone may not be able to, everyone should be restricted from having children? The last thing that any free society would want to do, is limit liberty for the perception of security (even financial security). As our good old friend Ben Franklin was quoted as saying (even though he really didn't say it), "Whoever shall trade a little liberty for a little security, deserves neither and will lose both". Security doesn't necessarily mean "physical" security.


An easy thing to say, but sh*t CAN hit the fans sometimes and then more than just the parents and kids suffer. Others do too.

As a single and celibate person, WHY do I have to help pay for someone else's kids education. How is that fair?


Poop can hit the fan with anything. I happen to live in a city where I'm lucky enough that I very rarely have to use a car, so just because the poop may hit the fan, should everyone be restricted from driving? By your logic, why should I have to potentially pay in case someone else has an accident?

The real question however, is what justifies your initiation of force?

Furthermore, many people, to include myself, take care of our kids and don't need help from anyone else with educating them. I rarely ever use a car, yet I'm forced to pay for roads, traffic cops, and auto-infrastructure. Why should I be responsible for that?

I'm a libertarian who doesn't believe in the public school system, however there isn't much that either of us can do about it because it just so happens that we are forced to accept it by the majority of our neighbors. That's life. If you don't like it, you have a right to not only assemble against such policies, but also speak freely per your 1st Amendment protection of those rights. I am no more responsible for the public education system than you are.

The way not to go about it, is to further limit peoples' liberties.

Look at it this way, I take care of my kids without needing help from anyone else, as does many other people in this country, why should we have force initiated against us because someone like you, who doesn't have any kids, doesn't want to be responsible for the kids of parents who can't take care of their kids? What makes it right that you can force your will on me, just because you don't want someone else's will forced on you, something that has nothing to do with me?

The initiation of force should never be justified. Now, that doesn't mean that force is never justified, only that initiating it isn't. Sure, by making you pay for public education or making me pay for public education is force being initiated against us, however we won't fix the problem by initiating force on someone else, someone who has no more to do with than you or I do.

I think the best solution is for force not to be initiated, where if people can't care of their children and others don't want to help (such as adoption or charity), then they lose out. It may suck for the first generation or two but as soon as people realize that the public will no longer be forced to pay for their children, they would stop pumping them out left and right. Instead, there is an incentive for many people to have babies that they themselves can't take care of.

These people who can't take care of their children, have nothing to do with me or the millions of other parents who can and do raise their children. By restricting us, you are only initiating force against us, just as you had force initiated against you to make you want to restrict the children in the first place. Why should I have to suffer so you won't, especially when it is apparently your problem to begin with? In other words, by you forcing your will on me, you are no better than those forcing their will on you.



--airspoon



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join