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.


DEPOPULATION - where would you start?

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:25 PM
I think I would start with ANY country that still
has the death penalty, the stoning of women, the cutting off of kids hands.

I would then move onto the long term unemployed. Give them an ultimatum. WORK or say goodbye.

Then the super rich. No need for them to have all that money and not share it.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:31 PM
I did not read all of the replies but the moive called "Children of Men" might be the best way to go. You DO NOT KILL anyone you just limit or stop "replacements". With all that is dieing every minute it would not take too long to thin things out.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:34 PM
reply to post by c0ldPhr34k

KILL KILL KILL! Counties with natural resources that incapable of supporting themselves should be taken over and chemically sterilized. The rest should be left to die of thirst! I personally think this needs to happen sooner then later. China seems to be the only country that is proactive towards this situation. Many people think the idea of depopulation is a conspiracy but I can assure you it's very real and very necessary. If you don't believe me read the book Legacy of Malthus. You will see that plans have been in motion for many years.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:52 PM
reply to post by JesusChristSr

(once again i am posting)

I read the comments, and WTF you guys are bloodthristy, what your brains are so small, you cant find a simple solution to a simple probelm?

Most of you focus on war and more death, bioweapons, like wtf is wrong with you people?

There is a peaceful and logical way without murdering one person, to bring the population to 2 billion, and it only takes 60 years (genetically inferiour die of natural causes not bullets)

You are simply barbaric, uncivilizied and makes things worse a warmongering idiot. Come on ATS you can do better than that.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:57 PM
If we HAD to de-populate I would suggest anyone 70 and over.
I mean who wants to live past 70 anyway? offense to any 70 year old.If I was 70 and it was for the good of the planet I would gladly give my life.

All the murderers in jail and out..All the child molesters would be another suggestion

But it starts with the babies.They have to have better birth control.And I don't mean some stupid pill,I mean I think only people who can afford a kid should be able to have one.So if they were able to stop women from having kids or men from impregnating them then that would be the best place to start.But they should be able to fix it back if the person is qualified to have one.Like say I'm sure they could block off something in man or women at a certain age so no ovaries get hatched.I'm sure they could come up with some idea.

Sounds harsh does it?Well these are harsh times.You can't drive a car without a license but you can have a baby?.

Birth control should be a main priority.This is why there are millions of people starving and dying.This is why you have a high crime rate!

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:07 PM
Easiest way to depopulate where it would take a long time to detect would be to somehow make more men sterile by adding some type of chemical to through our food supply or water. It would take generations to figure this out and by that time it would already be too late.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:18 PM
reply to post by GlennCanady

Do you think they would actually stop using oil?Do you know how much money oil produces?I'm sure you do.There's NO WAY they would want to stop that cash flow.And would probably go to extremes to make sure it doesn't stop.

Why do we pay for hydro?It's made by water for crying out loud!What the hell are we paying for?People barely make ends meet and they are always raising the damn bill!

There's no way they would give us electricity for free even though it's free to make.Why not?Because of the money.It's always about the money.

It's nice to dream though.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:34 PM
I would tell all of the Irish and Polish that there were lots of jobs going in the Antartic.....................

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 10:42 PM
This is totally immoral but let me have some childish fun and play dictator....

Yes, we'd definitely need some form of license or certification, just like you need a license to drive a car in public you'd need to have a license to have children. That is the first control mechanism.

Secondly, we'd need some "practical" rules detailing who can have children and when. Here's my "pragmatic and humane" list of rules for the "betterment of society:"

1) Having children is a privilege bestowed by the Government (O! Supreme Leader!).
2) Only those deemed fit to produce healthy and well-tended children shall be given this privilege.
3) Individuals and couples whose combined incomes are at or below the Federal Poverty Line may not be licensed.
4) Individuals who receive public welfare funds for over 2 years (combined lifetime total) must chose between permanent sterilization or loss of all public welfare benefits.
5) Unmarried couples may not be licensed.
6) Individuals who become pregnant without license will receive a court-ordered abortion at their own expense. Failure to pay will result in a minimum of 1 year of public service to repay their dept to society.
7) Individuals who have served a combined lifetime total of 13 months or more in Federal or State prison, or local jail, must accept permanent sterilization as part of repayment of their dept to society.

Originally posted by Ampelios
I would start with making the individual or individuals who are wanting to have children get a license to have a said amount of children based of the current numbers and the income and life style of the applicant.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 10:56 PM

Originally posted by Anthony1138
reply to post by onthedownlow

No more is better than anyone, execpt DNA. it never lies, say someone is genetically imbred, and someone says "you cant have kids, or else they will be mentally retarded" so he has kids (following you rule)

However if you would to control if he could have kids or not, then that is one (or more) less kid(s) with a genetic probelm.

It has nothing to do with race or religion, just genetics and intellgence. To promote a better future, rather then one full of wars (because people are too dumb and only want bloodshed) however and intellgent logical mind wouldnt want war or death.

Dont look at it from a liberal view, they want everyone alive at once, if they could every human that has ever lived, they would bring back to life because its "fair" but then over population sets it.

The needs of the many out weight the needs of the few.

Liberals want everyone alive? Hmm, no. Nazis and Communists (competing leftist ideologies) all practiced some form of eugenics or mass murder.

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 11:02 PM
right now you get tax breaks for having children... that's backwards. If you going to be putting kids into schools, you should pay higher taxes because tax dollars go to school funding. You should should get taxed handsomely for having children and not rewarded. perhaps there could be some very small tax incentive for NOT having children because even though it seems petty, many lower income people might try to be more careful just to get a few more duckets at the end of the year, rather than thinking if they just start having babies they can stay at home and take care of them because people will feel bad that they are in a bad situation with children and they will get benefits. If you get taxed and are low income and can't afford it then you should have to enter a rigid work program to get help and if you refuse, then you should have to face some type of consequences. You should get free birth control. They should talk more about the population explosion as an important issue because it IS.

this may seem rough but i don't have a lot of sympathy for guys who knock chicks up that can't pay for children and chicks who let guys knock them up. Outside of rape, getting pregnant is COMPLETELY by choice and if you can't take care for a child, you need to be careful. It's not that damn hard!

As it stands, people who do not have children and have a hard time staying on their feet are not as likely to get extra help from the government as needy... even though they're not getting themselves pregnant. Whereas the ones who are pregnant outside of rape are getting benefits because they can't work enough to do what they need to do but still get to hop in the bed with people?.... and that is supposed to be okay? that's bullsh!t!

they don't need to be in the bed. They need to be figuring out their situation... but as it stands, the best thing to do if you have no freaking clue what to do in life is hop in the bed with someone. that's backwards. the ones who don't hop in the bed who are having a hard time should get some credit for not thinking that way... not thinking they might as well start a damn family since they've got nothing better to do.

...and don't give me no "accidents happen"...yeah they do, when you're screwing all the time and not being careful and have nothing in the bank account. I'm not even going to say I haven't done it but I have CERTAINLY thought more about the consequences than a lot of other young people who now have children they can't pay for and knew this would be how it would go when they got in the damn bed!

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 11:09 PM
Not that I would ever want to "depopulate" the planet because it has plenty of resources for us all, but since we're talking hypotheticals. My first step would be allowing 3% of the population to control 99% of the world's resources and wealth... Hey wait a minute?!?!?

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by ChaosMagician

Honestly, your post is the most intelligent response yet. Usually I am more about sticks then carrots but your response deserves praise. This is one of those ideas where you think "sh#t why didn't I think of that" but it's brilliance lies in it's simplicity.

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 12:26 AM
reply to post by c0ldPhr34k

I have read only the opening statement, but my first thought is that all children who are designated mentally retarded or of low i.q. ability should be sterilized so that none can reproduce. Sadly, there are cases of children in homes for the m.r. who suffer sexual abuse and some girls have become pregnant. There is no need for children unable to care for children to ever reproduce and have children.

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 12:33 AM
reply to post by c0ldPhr34k

Well everybody that thinks overpopulation is such a big problem, line up and drink the koolaid. After that I guess we take a head count and see where we are. If we still need to reduce maybe all the 'not sure' folks could go volunteer to be sterilized, take a head count in another generation should be pretty good by then.

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 12:39 AM

Originally posted by JesusChristSr
reply to post by ChaosMagician

Honestly, your post is the most intelligent response yet. Usually I am more about sticks then carrots but your response deserves praise. This is one of those ideas where you think "sh#t why didn't I think of that" but it's brilliance lies in it's simplicity.

well, I do have to admit that sometimes my words are a tad abrasive when I'm trying to spit out a simple point. Knowing full well that doesn't always me look like the sharpest tool in the shed, I still have trouble containing the compulsion to get that way at times. What's ignorant to me is the fact that so many things in society seem backwards. This kind of throws fuel on the fire for me to want to put it as bluntly as I possibly can because it seems to fit the situation.

I know people have made mistakes and those people have often paid for those mistakes, but it seems to me that many people do not take having children nearly as serious as they should. It's a life... it's very serious. I know people with lot's of children who have had to work their fingers to the bone to support them but I have also known women who have literally stated that they "liked being pregnant" and after having 3 or 4 are thinking of having another one and go on to mention the benefits it will get them. There should be an incentive NOT to bring more children in the world that one is not capable of taking care of... not an incentive to do exactly that for those who can't find their way. Would you believe that in rough times when I couldn't find direction that I have actually been told that I "should have a baby"... because to be concerned with another life would put things into more clear perspective and i wouldn't be so caught up in searching for answers within myself and then I would look back and think how easy it was before I had a kid- is what was told to me by one person... and many others have suggested it to me including guys I have dated who were not employed.... as though it would give a "real" aspect to my life that would give me a newfound appreciation for my humanity.

I can hardly believe people sometimes. This is a LIFE we're talking about... not some self help book that you can throw in the garbage after reading. My point is, that is what people do. They start growing up and the next steps seems to be to just start a family! It is something that is too widely accepted in our society to think that it's just a little mistake and after you make that mistake... it will only add love. No ones going to hate you for it and this may be true and no one should use anger towards someone who has been involved in an unwanted pregnancy because I cannot call myself an advocate of abortion and I think anger fuels this decision. What's done is done and should be accepted but FIRST AND FOREMOST... people need to be given an incentive to be more careful and religion is not doing the trick. Hit them where it hurts, in the pocket book. Think of all the more well to do families that will be able to afford higher taxes and what a benefit that could be... but as it stands, we reward careless behavior and accept it as a part of life.

That is totally backwards!.. and it's ingrained into culture.
edit on 18-12-2010 by ChaosMagician because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 12:45 AM
if population was so much of a problem like people claim it is, i would make it so that having children does NOT mean extra income. if people felt the FULL financial burden of having kids, it would make them more responsible about how many they should have.

i am thinking unemployed/single mothers who have numerous children, way above the average.

take that finance away, and benefit those who choose to have 1 child or none. you are not forcing people into anything with this method. and you are letting parents decide what kind of life they want, and the quality of it.

also educate people about the problems that come about from to many people and not enough carrying capacity.
i would start this in countries that have the most population first.

that is if there really is a problem
edit on 18-12-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 01:26 AM
reply to post by ChaosMagician

Your words were well spoken and your message is clear. While most, including myself, looked to bloodshed and savagery as our solution you came up with a much less primitive answer. For a student of Austin Spare your mind illuminates a certain uniqueness. Maybe you should find a more sophisticated path that can nurture your intelect. Who knows, maybe even a bright future with the big /G\. Remember, all you have to do is ask.

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 01:43 AM
Living the life I have lived has actually led me to some personal reflection on this topic , more often than I would like actually. Not particularly how I would depopulate the world, but about unwanted pregnacies/ unwanted children.
It is proven that educated people usually have less children. In other countries , having more children is a way of sustaining life, and some cultures believe that having many children is "gods way". Of course in many cultures , having a child is a burden and more then one could bear ,so attacking population control would have to look at all these aspects about the world , culture and beleif systems.
On a completely morbid note , and directly answering the question; if I were a mad scientist , I would make a vaccine to sterilize people on a mass scale. This however has much to do with my culture , that people are sexually driven and too many babies are born unwanted , uncared for and abused. To be honest , the thought of this really doesn't bother me a whole hell of a lot. Birth control , the day after pill and the Ru486 pill are morally permissible and in my opinion , very effective means of sustaining a population, in a culture that is sexually permiscuous and monetarily driven.
The reasons behind people breeding though are so often (not always) selfish , self driven or completely irresponsible . I suggest using sheer psychology to combat morons from breeding, and allow birth control and alternatives to pregnancy to be free . I say Hand out birth control as if it were candy on Halloween night . Make sterilization a free program. Use incentives ...utilize propoganda and the media . Hmmmmmm.....

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 01:44 AM
I cant understand why we are all so sure of ourselves.

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in