- 9,025
- 8,118
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
Or... We could just stop financially incentivize having kids... You want kids, fine, but you shouldn't get tax breaks because of it. Now Obama wants a childcare tax credit too? _OH.
Could society function better if there were restrictions on who could have kids?
Or... We could just stop financially incentivize having kids... You want kids, fine, but you shouldn't get tax breaks because of it. Now Obama wants a childcare tax credit too? _OH.
RustyShackleford
Supporter
- 63,176
- 189,568
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
Last edited:
- 299
- 394
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
Hello Hitler/Eugenics/Social Darwinism
- 15,460
- 21,737
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2014
Poor people don't have kids because they're poor.Poor people have more children brah.
Last edited:
- 16,354
- 5,052
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2004
- 316
- 151
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2014
Jezebel is one of those sites no one over the age of 20, male or female, should visit.
- 15,134
- 15,763
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
when i bust nuts, i make the world a better place
- 16,543
- 7,757
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2013
Honestly, yes, but let people do what they're going to do anyway.
Folks should just be accountable for their actions.
Folks should just be accountable for their actions.
- 481
- 306
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2014
No because there's no effective, fair way to implement this. Politics is corrupt. You're going to put the choice who gets to have a child or not in the hands of those same politicians?
Last edited:
- 44,157
- 2,482
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
Yes OP, I totally could see this benefitting society. I truly think this would solve a ton a problems in individuals lives.
- 3,870
- 4,749
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
I came and typed a bunch of garbage. Changed my mind - people are going to do what they do. Humanities only hope (sadly) is some sort of big natural disaster or man made (e.g., supervirus created) taking out a large (10%+) percentage of the population.
We are too hard wired to make drastic changes like this. Tradition, culture, religion and conservatism are pillars of human nature - it is not in our genes to adapt or change quickly. Having good habits is as easy as having bad habits.
There should be restrictions on:
1. Amount of capital wealth any one individual is allowed to accumulate
2. Amount of material wealth (e.g., houses, cars, etc) is allowed to accumulate
3. Every human should have access to water, food, housing, education and medical care at no cost
4. Politics should be more about anonymity and vision rather than short-term votes. It's run like a corporation nowadays.
But, whatever. We as humans are short-sighted and don't understand that our time here is likely limited. People having millions + mansions +. people that won't give that up to feed a dying child is just a sad state of affairs. We are better now than at any point in our history, but to the educated and open minded it still seems like we have so far to go.
We are too hard wired to make drastic changes like this. Tradition, culture, religion and conservatism are pillars of human nature - it is not in our genes to adapt or change quickly. Having good habits is as easy as having bad habits.
There should be restrictions on:
1. Amount of capital wealth any one individual is allowed to accumulate
2. Amount of material wealth (e.g., houses, cars, etc) is allowed to accumulate
3. Every human should have access to water, food, housing, education and medical care at no cost
4. Politics should be more about anonymity and vision rather than short-term votes. It's run like a corporation nowadays.
But, whatever. We as humans are short-sighted and don't understand that our time here is likely limited. People having millions + mansions +. people that won't give that up to feed a dying child is just a sad state of affairs. We are better now than at any point in our history, but to the educated and open minded it still seems like we have so far to go.
- 8,573
- 1,766
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
Who are you, or who is anyone for that matter, to tell someone they can't bring a life into the world?
- 148
- 183
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2014
Then they will decide:
What food you can/can't eat
What clothes you can/can't wear
What drugs you can/can't/will take
What TV you can/can't watch
Give the government power to do one thing and they will assume powers to do a lot more things, one bill at time until we aren't free to do anything without big daddy governments permission slip.
- 20,171
- 4,155
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
They would probably just discriminate against minorities
- 28,476
- 11,716
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
I'll raise you one more. It would just be rich, white people telling the rest of us how many kids we can have.
- 2,347
- 1,094
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2013
I think society would function better if this machine wasn't in place
- 316
- 151
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2014
Who is anyone to tell someone how fast they can drive on a public street?
How loud they can play their music late at night?
Whether or not they can leave their car with the hazards on in the middle of the street while running into a store?
Almost every law in existence restricts us so that we don't impinge on general society's quality of life.
- 13,391
- 5,167
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2012
I actually think about this all the time...
Look at how quickly populations have risen in the past 300 years... At this pace, Earth will be drastically stripped of its resources and will be over populated... Soon... Very ******* soon... And this isn't taking into account the financial burden of stupid people having stupid kids having stupid kids...
- 40,464
- 41,210
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2002
The government? No.
The people? Yes.
The people? Yes.
- 21,365
- 812
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
Population problems were a very interesting topic in college. Professor was right, give it a decade or two more and things will start to get bad in a hurry. There is not enough drinking water, crops, soil, land for this population's exponential increase
- 8,715
- 5,390
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2013
Before we can answer your question we have to ask:
What is "better"? and Who gets to decide what "better" is?
What is "better"? and Who gets to decide what "better" is?
- 1,948
- 834
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2005
Humans have tried restricting who can reproduce for years now. Forced sterilization, china's one child policy etc have all pretty much failed. Not to mention the morality of it.
Last edited:
- 628
- 360
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2013
There's actually more than enough land , people just all choose to live in the same area
I think it was posted here before that the entire earth population could fit in Texas and the population density would be like Manhattan
I think it was posted here before that the entire earth population could fit in Texas and the population density would be like Manhattan
- 299
- 394
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
You should read the Population Bomb. People have been proclaiming this since the 1960's. Further exponential population growth doesn't exist in too many places anymore. Even nations like India and Brazil have reached birth rates comparable to Industrialized nations. I'm not saying goods and wealth can't be distributed more equally, or that agriculture doesn't need improving, but the whole 'overpopulation" fear is a total myth.
- 299
- 394
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
Sorry for the double post but I don't get this logic. You seem to be attacking straw men, with rules for society instead of changing the real issue. Enforcing arbitrary limits on wealth and possessions is punitive at best, and totally discourages hard work and progress at worst. If you want to see real change in living standards for all people you need to see a shift in culture, not a forced redistribution of wealth.
