Birth permit

[Canell]

Social welfare, overpopulation, resource scarcity, ethnic map, etc. Do you think they can or must result in a "birth permit", i.e. the state dictating demographics in exchange of welfare, for example? :mrgreen: Could it be direct (license) or indirect (taxation) permit?
Should criminals, drug addicts, hobos, etc be allowed to have children?

Are we headed that direction? I mean, China already implemented something like this (heavy taxation for a second child) due to huge population and scarce territory. Please, share your thoughts.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

In theory, yes. In theory, I think we should just stop letting people breed until all the kids that are already here and homeless are adopted.

But I can't support that in reality, for 2 reasons.

1. It's a violation of human rights, and subject to not-necessarily-accurate personal judgment.

2. There's better ways to go about it. China's birth rate right now, 1-child policy and all, is about 1.8. But countries with better education and less poverty have an even lower birth rate. Most of Western Europe is in the 1.2-1.8 range. Education works better - it just requires more effort.

 

[DemonMyst]

2. There's better ways to go about it. China's birth rate right now, 1-child policy and all, is about 1.8. But countries with better education and less poverty have an even lower birth rate. Most of Western Europe is in the 1.2-1.8 range. Education works better - it just requires more effort.

Actually you have that backwards.. Countries with worse education and poverty have higher birthrates..

List of sovereign states and dependent territories by birth rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Birth rate (most recent) by country

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Actually you have that backwards.. Countries with worse education and poverty have higher birthrates..

List of sovereign states and dependent territories by birth rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Birth rate (most recent) by country

Yes, that's what I said. Lower education and more poverty correlated with higher birth rate (I was using per-woman stats, not per-1000). Given that more of the Western European people have access to education, and less are poor, it is understandable why their birth rates are the same or lower than China's, even without a law limiting number of children.

 

[DemonMyst]

I am on the fence on this one.. I see many valid and good reasons to limiting our nations birth rate.. The question is really, how do you do it and how do you enforce it.. What about religious issue??

 

[DemonMyst]

Yes, that's what I said. Lower education and more poverty correlated with higher birth rate (I was using per-woman stats, not per-1000). Given that more of the Western European people have access to education, and less are poor, it is understandable why their birth rates are the same or lower than China's, even without a law limiting number of children.

*Sigh* My bad.. Read that wrong.. It is getting late for me I guess.. But you are correct.. I misread your post.. Sorry about that..

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

*Sigh* My bad.. Read that wrong.. It is getting late for me I guess.. But you are correct.. I misread your post.. Sorry about that..

All good, cuzzy. I get it. I got a couple beers in me. What's a forum if you can't be excessively tired or tipsy while typing? :rock

 

[ecofarm]

Yes, that's what I said. Lower education and more poverty correlated with higher birth rate (I was using per-woman stats, not per-1000). Given that more of the Western European people have access to education, and less are poor, it is understandable why their birth rates are the same or lower than China's, even without a law limiting number of children.

This is a well-documented issue. It boils down to death rates, primarily a function of child-mortality. First death rates fall (due to education, sanitation, medical care and food security among other factors) and only then do birth rates fall. Basically, if 50% of your children are probably going to die then you have more than replacement fertility.

Demographic transition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

At any rate, China is a tough place to compare to other places. Their totalitarian control of even the most basic thing like reprouction and their non-transparent calculation of child mortality (formally and informally) make most of their figures unreliable. Like their economy, it is difficult to discern what is really happening (similar to the USSR back in the day).

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I am on the fence on this one.. I see many valid and good reasons to limiting our nations birth rate.. The question is really, how do you do it and how do you enforce it.. What about religious issue??

You don't have to. Good sex ed and reducing poverty work better. It's more hard work, but it's ethically better anyway. China's 1.8 birth rate is only what they report. It's actually probably higher than that in reality. In which case, Western Europe (and possibly even us) are doing way better than China already, with no legal child limits needed.

In addition to that, China's policy has lead to some pretty bad stuff - forced abortion, infanticide, etc.

 

[ecofarm]

The demographic transition is extensively documented. It has happened in every nation in which death rates dropped.


Lower the death rate and the birth rate follows: fact.

Education can alo be a factor but usually by the time we have gotten to that point the basic sanitation and food issues have been solved and the death rate is dropping. One example of education helping is in Kenya, where the division of family land between many children has taught people to family plan more extensively; however, Kenyans are willing to consider family planning (mostly the chronologic spacing of births) only because most of their children survive today (and that's what caused the problem with land divisions in the first place). Thus, education in Kenya is speeding up the demographic transition. Without the death rate dropping, however, education does little to no good.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

The demographic transition is extensively documented. It has happened in every nation in which death rates dropped.


Lower the death rate and the birth rate follows: fact.

Education can alo be a factor but usually by the time we have gotten to that point the basic sanitation and food issues have been solved and the death rate is dropping. One example of education helping is in Kenya, where the division of family land between many children has taught people to family plan more extensively.

True. China technically has that ability, but I got into an interesting discussion about China the other day.

Their huge population may be devaluing their worth of individuals (in addition to how Communism itself does that). China is economically competitive because a tiny fraction of their population is still a huge number of people. So they can get away with leaving most of the nation poor, and get on with being competitive. There's no incentive for the leaders or the rich to pull up the poor majority, basically.

 

[ecofarm]

The elite in China live of off (literally) child slave labor and a total lack of enforcement regarding environmental law. They also lack any civil law. China's system is perhaps the best example of unsustainability in the world. They value their own currency, forge their child mortality rates and treat their own as slaves. If (and when) China adopts basic labor, civil and environmental rights - the country will collapse and probably fragment.

China is the world's paper tiger.

 

[roguenuke]

Our birth rate is already lower than China without any kind of child policy.

And the US birth rate is already at an all time low.

U.S. Birth Rate Hits All-Time Low
Live Births and Birth Rates, by Year — Infoplease.com
U.S. birth rate: Drop in birth rate is the biggest in 30 years - Los Angeles Times

We have the ability to allow women past menopause to be able to bear children (using donor egg) and we still have a drop in the birth rate.

There is no need to restrict people from having kids in any way because the problem isn't more children being born, it is people living longer. And it is very wrong to mandate who can or cannot have children or how many children a person/couple should have.

Now, I am not opposed to finding a way to reduce the incentives for having multiple children just for some financial gain to either or both parents. Limiting how many child credits a couple/person can claim is a start. Also, finding a good way to discourage people from having children while on government welfare would also help.

And we should be trying to encourage more people, especially those who want children but can't have their own, to adopt rather than spending the money to try to have their own blood-related child, but it should not be mandated. Some ways to do this is to ensure that all discriminatory barriers to adoption are taken out while not compromising on the quality of adoptive parents (i.e. allowing gays to adopt, unmarried couples to adopt, single people to adopt while maintaining strict background checks and proper screening for all potential adoptive parents, and ensuring that adoption is a lot more affordable than IVF, surrogacy, or other procedures like these).

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Social welfare, overpopulation, resource scarcity, ethnic map, etc. Do you think they can or must result in a "birth permit", i.e. the state dictating demographics in exchange of welfare, for example? :mrgreen: Could it be direct (license) or indirect (taxation) permit?
Should criminals, drug addicts, hobos, etc be allowed to have children?

Are we headed that direction? I mean, China already implemented something like this (heavy taxation for a second child) due to huge population and scarce territory. Please, share your thoughts.

My wife and I were approached about adopting a little girl in foster care.
The ****ing adoption process is so damn difficult that it looks like we won't be able to complete it.

But any ****tard can squeeze out 8 kids in a 1 bedroom apartment.
Doesn't make any sense.

 

[roguenuke]

My wife and I were approached about adopting a little girl in foster care.
The ****ing adoption process is so damn difficult that it looks like we won't be able to complete it.

But any ****tard can squeeze out 8 kids in a 1 bedroom apartment.
Doesn't make any sense.

This is exactly why we need to change our adoption policies. It takes way too long for us to decide that someone or a couple are fit to be adoptive parents.

I don't see why the adopting process shouldn't be some basic background check (ensure that the person/people aren't pedos or known abusers or drug users or non-recovering alcoholics). Basic financial check to ensure that the couple can afford a child. And then do some checkins with the family from time to time for a limited amount of time or until the child is of a certain age to ensure the child is doing okay. The time period of the last one could be dependent on any suspect information and the results of previous checkins.

It shouldn't cost more or take more time to adopt than it does to have your own children, especially going through artificial methods to have your own children.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I won't support any policy that attempts to impose a birth limit on citizens. On the other hand, if a family is receiving government assistance, I do support removing any additional children from the home who are produced after the benefits started.

 

[Temporal]

It wouldn't really solve the social problems, so no.

If you want problems solved, you have to raise people's consciousness by improving things like diet, health care, education, etc.

More laws and restrictions are not a solution, but I suppose as people become more stupid and medicated, the government will increasingly control bodily functions.

 

[spud_meister]

You gonna lock people up for having an illegal baby?

 

[Canell]

You gonna lock people up for having an illegal baby?

Me? Not really, no.
May be just impose 50% income tax. :mrgreen:

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Plus, I think trying to limit the birth rate is the absolute worst thing we could do for our economic health. If anything, we should be encouraging it.

 

[samsmart]

Social welfare, overpopulation, resource scarcity, ethnic map, etc. Do you think they can or must result in a "birth permit", i.e. the state dictating demographics in exchange of welfare, for example? :mrgreen: Could it be direct (license) or indirect (taxation) permit?
Should criminals, drug addicts, hobos, etc be allowed to have children?

Are we headed that direction? I mean, China already implemented something like this (heavy taxation for a second child) due to huge population and scarce territory. Please, share your thoughts.

I voted "Other."

I think that a woman who is pregnant should be required to attend parenting classes that teach and train her in her duties and responsibilities as a mother. If she fails this course then her child should be taken away from her until such a time as her fitness to be a parent can be re-determined. To make up for any financial hardship caused by this, all women get maternity leave paid for by the state and their employment will be protected by law.

 

[samsmart]

I am on the fence on this one.. I see many valid and good reasons to limiting our nations birth rate.. The question is really, how do you do it and how do you enforce it.. What about religious issue??

I'm not so concerned about lowering the birth rate as I am concerned with lowering the parenting rate.

I'm fine with having a good birth rate. I just want to limit who can become parents. Because there's a lot of people out there who are breeding who really shouldn't be. Personally, that's what I want to put a stop to.

 

[Ikari]

The elite in China live of off (literally) child slave labor and a total lack of enforcement regarding environmental law. They also lack any civil law. China's system is perhaps the best example of unsustainability in the world. They value their own currency, forge their child mortality rates and treat their own as slaves. If (and when) China adopts basic labor, civil and environmental rights - the country will collapse and probably fragment.

China is the world's paper tiger.

Hell yeah they do. That's why they're so cheap. There's no way a company based in America could really compete without tarrifs with a company based in China because in America we have proper labor and environmental laws and all those cost money.

In terms of the poll, I voted that the State should stay out of it, but I also wanted to vote "Hell no! That's an outrageous idea" because it's outrageous to suggest that the government has proper means of control here. America is fine, we're at replacement. That's a good place to be.

 

[tessaesque]

Too dangerous. The government can't even place existing children in quality foster/adoptive care. I don't trust them to determine who can or can't be parents before they're given the option to be parents. I do, however, support mandatory sterilization for repeat offenders found guilty of child neglect or abuse.

 

[roguenuke]

I voted "Other."

I think that a woman who is pregnant should be required to attend parenting classes that teach and train her in her duties and responsibilities as a mother. If she fails this course then her child should be taken away from her until such a time as her fitness to be a parent can be re-determined. To make up for any financial hardship caused by this, all women get maternity leave paid for by the state and their employment will be protected by law.

First of all, that would be gender discrimination, since you are only requiring mothers to attend such a class and not the fathers.

Second of all, people would never go for a pass or fail mandatory parenting class because the government should not be allowed to mandate to people how they should be raising their children. Protecting children from abuse is one thing, but requiring that people know how to raise their children "the right way" is wrong.