How to save the world - don't have more than two children | Mail Online

Well I told you so ! :-)

"While Britain need not follow the example of China and ban large families, having more than two children should be frowned upon in the same way as using a patio heater or driving a gas guzzling car."

And no doubt they'll tax the chance of having any more children into an impossibility in the same way too. :-)

I hope all those enviro "libertarians" who believe it should be the god given right of individual couples of when to have children without nanny state interference, will speak out in huge condemnation of it.

But I honestly expect them to suck up to the state they love and trust so much, whilst stabbing everyone including themselves in the back in typical enviro-state-brainwashed fashion whilst harping on about global warning.

"Until it was discredited by Nazism, population control in the first half of the 20th century was most closely associated with eugenics - the belief that 'undesirable' qualities should removed from populations to improve future generations."

I'd say it's coming back again, but eugenics and population control have always been here - just that they've been in the form of cancer, AIDS and other diseases.

Just now they're turning it up a notch, and want to control your family too.

Enjoy your future :-)
[Rep]

It makes perfect sense to me. The world is hopelessly overpopulated.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
And no doubt they'll tax the chance of having any more children into an impossibility in the same way too. :-)

As far as I'm aware the Optimum Population Trust, who are proposing this notion, have no tax raising powers nor do they dictate fiscal policy.
Your rant should be directed against them if you don't agree with their idea.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
It makes perfect sense to me. The world is hopelessly overpopulated.

I agree! No one in their right mind with today's availability of contraception would have more children than they can afford to bring up! Unfortunately it is not as simple as that!. Lack of education, Religious beliefs and good old fashioned , couldn't give a s**t are three reasons why the World is overpopulated,+the modern trend of some single young ladies who look on having children as a sort of wage earned from benefits! Every time pitiful pictures of people starving in Africa appear on TV, these people are always surrounded by very young starving children, why did they have them?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by kernow:
I agree! No one in their right mind with today's availability of contraception would have more children than they can afford to bring up!

the problem is that they DO have children which we then pay to bring up. Family allowance, family credit, income support etc etc etc

The whole child poverty agenda is geared to encourage profligation, much of it amongst single parents and those ethnics who 'traditionally' have large families.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by C_steam:
the problem is that they DO have children which we then pay to bring up. Family allowance, family credit, income support etc etc etc

It's a fair point.
The welfare system doesn't encourage people to take responsibility for their own actions. In fact, it would appear to encourage the abrogation of responsibility.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
As far as I'm aware the Optimum Population Trust, who are proposing this notion, have no tax raising powers nor do they dictate fiscal policy.
Your rant should be directed against them if you don't agree with their idea.

I was obviously talking about the government you complete idiot.
[Rep]

I knew I'd get the repsonse: "The world is hopelessly overpopulated."

But what does that actually mean in reality ?

Personally I've got plenty of room to move around, so what's the big deal ?

You're a bunch of brainwashed muppets who are quite happy to be slaves to the system that have trained you to be so.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
I was obviously talking about the government you complete idiot.

His point was that you shouldn't be because they have nothing to do with the suggestion. You should be complaining about the Optimum Population Trust, who to me sound like the same sort of radical zero-growth organisations who we could well do without.

And calling someone an idiot because they happen to point out one of your mistakes is a big no-no.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Akria:
His point was that you shouldn't be because they have nothing to do with the suggestion. You should be complaining about the Optimum Population Trust, who to me sound like the same sort of radical zero-growth organisations who we could well do without.

And calling someone an idiot because they happen to point out one of your mistakes is a big no-no.

Firstly Akria, I totally commend you for speaking out in condemnation of this organization. :-)

You say "they(the government) have nothing to do with the suggestion"

Are you sure about that ?

First, note that the article says: "But critics said doctors and governments had no right to tell parents how many children to have - and that population control could lead to more problems than it solved."

Ok not too much proven so far, but obviously the person that made the statement felt the need to mention government, so I'm not alone at least.

Now look at this:

Optimum Population Trust | FPRI Think Tank Directory

So yes it's a think tank.

Notice it says:

Audience:
Policymakers !!

Who else but governments are the policymakers ?

Sure you may argue that technically that doesn't necessarily mean that government will adopt it as policy, but when we consider the government's green agenda and what's seems to be staring us in the face, we should be very concerned indeed.

Note also I have said several times on this forum what the future government policy would(ok "may") be - was that just a total co-incidence ?

Bear in mind if it does becomes policy, then it's too late.

Another thing you may notice is that the above think tank is under the umbrella of the FPRI - i.e. Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Hmmm - interesting ?

Now I wasn't sure what this meant until I went to the section "About FPRI" to see who they were and read their mission statement where it clearly says:
(follow this link - About FPRI)

"Mission
Founded in 1955, FPRI is devoted to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the development of policies that advance U.S. national interests. We add perspective to events by fitting them into the larger historical and cultural context of international politics."

U.S National Interests ?!!!! :-) :-) :-)

Why the hell does the Optimum Population Trust come under the banner of an institute that seeks to advance U.S national interests ?!!!

Oh yes I forgot it's a "global" problem ?! :-)

So forgive me but it has potentially and most likely everything to do with government policy !

To think that these "thinks tanks" are independent of government is I believe, a bit naive to say the least.

In truth, they exist as institutions which help support government's policy and interests - hence "U.S national interests".
Note not the interests of the environment, the earth or the world but "policies that advance U.S. national interests."

Anyway I apologize to Clippo for calling him an idiot but please wake up and smell the coffee people.
[Rep]