Why Rich People Should Pay For Poor People's Birth Control

For starters, humans don't NEED birth control or healthcare. Throughout history, prehistory, and even in modern times, humans just reproduce as many offspring as possible. Nature doesn't care about one's own personal happiness level. Nature will just select for the individuals with the highest reproductive fitness. Whoever is able to breed the most number of healthy, viable, fertile offspring will have their genes carried on for generations. This fact works very well throughout history and is complemented by morality (that it is wrong to abort or prevent a pregnancy).

However, in modern times, humans face a new problem. Humans have become so successful at breeding and eliminating causes of death that infant mortality and maternity mortality at childbirth decline, and that the life expectancy increases. With more people breeding and less people exiting the world, the world will become exponentially more populous, and soon, humanity will eventually run out of resources and space to live in.

Now, you may think, "Humans should stop engaging in sexual intercourse. No sex means no babies." While that is the most apt, rational response to this overpopulation crisis, that is not practical. And it is not practical, because too many humans are not rational. When you have irrational, stupid humans, someone will always do something stupid. Sometimes, this stupidity leads other humans to make protective guidelines for other humans. Other times, this stupidity makes babies. Combined with a nurturing and safe environment, these stupid babies grow up to become stupid adults, and the cycle repeats itself. Nature doesn't for rational intelligence. It just selects for who will breed the most offspring. If stupid people breed the most, then the future will be full of stupid people.

So, what does this mean for people who are both rich and smart? It means that they should control these stupid people. To control the population of these people, these stupid people should be given birth control. Humans already give birth control to deer and other mammals. So, giving birth control to humans is a non-violent way to prevent human overpopulation. It is possible to just legalize homicide, war, torture, genocide, forced sterilization, and the like on 99% of the global human population, but doing that would be extremely difficult, as most people in the 99% do not want to be selected out of the gene pool. They all want to be in the 1% of breeding individuals. So, what do humans do? The smart ones use their superior intellect to make birth control for the dumb ones. Making birth control costs money, so the rich ones should work with the smart ones to provide funding, legislation, and social pressures to prevent the dumb ones from making babies.

Because the purpose of birth control is contrary to one's evolutionary biology, some humans, persuaded by traditional moral beliefs, may be offended that they and their fellow humans are given birth control. Also, the human psychology must be taken into account. If the humans are made to feel inferior (that they are too stupid/irrational and thus make stupid decisions like having sex without the financial resources to take care of a child), then they will experience reactance and do the opposite of what they should do. They may even make babies just to spite everyone else. That's why creating the right language is important to offer birth control to stupid people who fuck too much.

If humans want to decrease the population, then the number of deaths must be greater than the number of births.

If rich, smart, and powerful people still refuse to finance birth control (including contraception and abortion services) for the poor, then they should not blame the poor for failing to rear the child properly. Poor people do not have the resources to give every child the same lifestyle and standard of living as rich people. Therefore, poor people should be free to let the child die. Let Nature take away the child's life. Infant mortality among the poor will increase, but that is to be expected and should be treated as a positive thing to thin out the number of people entering the world. Clean water access should not be delivered to the poor either, because clean water raises personal hygiene and public sanitation, thereby decreasing infant mortality rate among the poor. If humans want to decrease the population, then the number of deaths must be greater than the number of births.

Therefore, the poor, which constitutes the majority of the human population, should have two options. One, they should let their offspring (at least just the weaker ones) die and deserve no blame for letting them die. Two, they should be given birth control and be made to think that they have some control over their lives, even though it's actually the rich and powerful people who control the lives of the poor people by providing and enforcing the use of birth control.

My personal opinion is that national governments should all favor the latter option over the first option. The first option, while achieves the same goal, causes too much suffering in the world. Nobody wants to see their children die. Even if their children are weak, defected, stupid, or sick, parents generally don't want to see their children die. Parents always think that their weak/defected/stupid/sick children are going to live and thrive despite being the runt of the litter. There should not be a debate about whether or not people should be offered free access to condoms. Offering birth control for the poor (such as free biodegradeable condoms) is the only way for rich people to control the sex lives of poor and stupid people.


2|1
1855

Most Helpful Guy

  • You are talking in terms of the betterment of mankind.
    Nobody gives a shit about the betterment of mankind, especially if it meant that their money is at stake. Everybody just wants what is better for them not what is better for society or the future of humanity, and what is better for me is to ask you to piss off. I am not paying for other people's shit. IF anything, we might wanna install laws prohibiting people from having more than one child or limit the number of their children to their household income - something around that area.

    3|1
    0|1

Most Helpful Girl

  • Thew word for this viewpoint is "eugenics." It was a big movement about 100 years ago, and Margaret Sanger, who played a big role in developing the pill, was involved in it. Google it.

    One weakness of your argument is that you equate "poor" with "stupid." You need to clear that up.

    Also, to make your system work, you would have to economically disincentivize having children. If welfare checks increase for every child someone has, then there's an economic incentive not to use birth control.

    1|3
    0|1

Join the discussion

What Guys Said 54

  • Being poor and having low intelligence isn't synonymous. It's two different things and your economical situation hasn't necessary anything with your intelligence to do with. There's usually a good reason why some people is richer and some people is poorer. Some rich people inherit their money from their family and not every rich people earned money on big companies. Some people are poor because of their health and is therefor not capable to work or the country's situation like in 3rd world countries is the causes of it. The wealth shouldn't decide who deserves to live and who doesn't deserve to live.

    I thinks investing on education would be a good idea. If you wants the population to know better knowledge is the way to go. People who knows how impregnation work is more likely to be careful and take more responsibility since they knows the consequences. When it comes to birth controls it already exists charity organizations that gives free sexual education and birth controls where the money are coming from voluntarily people who supports.

    0|0
    0|0
    • ever heard of the bell curve. Being in poor areas tends to mean there is more crime, and where there is more crime there are more people who are subject to this way of living and end up having forms of ptsd from it. I have seen it and am constantly paranoid after living in a area like this. being poor and having some kind of mental illness or low intelligence is indirectly related with eachother

    • Show All
    • @imbored2252, Oh. In Norway the crime rate is very low and I rarely hears about gangs here. So for me some other countries in the world sounds a lot different and for me things sometimes sounds a bit distant. I hopes your country finds a solution on the problems.

    • its probably going to end bad, as everyone is turned on each other here

  • Won't work real poor people rely on breeding and having so many kids that the kids will bring in money and support the older poorer parents. They want to breed think of it as a small ant farm. To them it does not matter much if their kid gets knocked up at 16. It means that hopefully they get another guy to help bring in money. I'm guessing your middle class or higher and have never lived in a very poor area. I'm talking about one where none of the houses have heating or AC.

    Put that money into schooling to better educate the poor kids so they will grow up to good contributing members of society. Instead of hooligans that will likely join a gang or run drugs for good cash.

    0|1
    0|0
    • It's more a case of falling birth rates and an aging population meaning there is no one to replace the current workforce leading to a decline economically and no one to support old age pensioners.

    • Somewhat true lower jobs can easily be replaced but higher ones are hard to replace. So while higher jobs come and go often with the old worker dying. Companies often are born and die with the original owner's death or a lack of good leadership being replenished. Lower jobs are always there even skilled jobs. With people being swapped out.

      China really has that problem that your talking about.

    • Japan too. I fear I'm going to be working into my 90's. Maybe the next wave of job automation will fix it.

  • What a callous rant. Poor people are not by nature stupid, In fact they are very intelligent. They overcome all difficulties to survive in many clever, intelligent unique ways. They adapt, they utilise what they need.
    Why should the wealth of your parents determine who lives and who should be left to die. There are plenty of stupid, unintelligent rich who would have nothing nor the intelligence to make or do anything to survive were it not for their wealth.
    If you want a balanced society, the rich must play their part, or eventually their wealth will be taken from them. That's what history tells us. It's time for you to learn those lessons.

    1|2
    0|0
  • Without addresses specifics, I generally agree with this and it's why I also support abortion. For the most part, the people seeking it usually have no business having a kid so it's in society's best interest to support their ability to prevent pregnancy. It's basically allowing people lower on the gene pool to selectively euthanize themselves. From a purely practical standpoint this is actually beneficial.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Just keep your legs closed

    2|5
    0|0
  • ''the world will become exponentially more populous, and soon, humanity will eventually run out of resources and space to live in.''

    over population is a myth and it has been proven that under tough circumstances/poverty more people reproduce however, that isn't the case anymore as the world becomes more educated and has better living standards. At the rate we are going, we won't over populate this population in the next generation in fact, our population will actually lower a bit and become more steady. dont believe what I am saying? look at the average rate for people who are having kids and compare it to the point where our population nearly sky rocketed in the time span of 100 years. Basically, education is where it starts. Giving people handouts does not help, it feeds into their problem and makes it worse, which is why welfare also states that you have to be doing some kind of labor, and not collecting check as a lot of people just spawned a bunch of babies and lived happily ever after off of other peoples money. The majority of the money that you want for handouts are supposed to go to education and building the infrastructure of this country for better living conditions, not money to help you get birth control so you can do the same thing the next month and not learn what you are doing wrong. thats money wasted, and money does not grow on trees, even for rich people

    0|1
    0|0
    • Rich people are scum, you go on about the poor on welfare not working, what about trust fund brats? They go their entire lives without doing a day's work, and, they enjoy a far higher standard of luveing than the recipients is welfare. I'd like to round up and kill everyone who was born into a rich family.

    • Show All
    • There are a LOT of people like that out there. Far more than are vocal about it. If given the opportunity, and they were told that it would improve their lives, all of the various snowflake groups would most likely happily commit genocide against the productive people.

      Western society is tearing itself apart.

    • @Barrabus_the_Free dude I agree 100% there was one guy outside who used to say he wanted to round up white people and shoot them all because he is the reason why he was poor.

  • Now, I like the idea, except you haven't accounted for a few things. What about the rich, dumb people? The heirs to wealthy franchises, those who in essence should not be reproducing but still remain wealthy? The poor and smart are not so much a problem, since the cycle of poverty tends to take care of those one way or another.

    Also... we don't need this. We have no conceivable reason for implementing such a policy. The earth is not quite overpopulated. We are merely taxing it's resources far too much, and polluting it a lot. Now, who doe the resource farming and major pollution?
    Companies and factories. I think you've wrongly identified all the problem makers.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I would rather just sterilize the stupid people who reproduce like rabbits and actually encourage self control and restraint. Contrary to popular belief, promiscuity is not natural. It is the result of leftist social engineering and indoctrination from the media. Prior to the Sexual Revolution, most societies across the globe actually were capable of being sexually responsible and waiting until marriage. Which brings me onto my next point, the problem comes not from large, traditional families - most of which are self sufficient and environmentally sustainable like the Amish - but from whores and sluts who have multiple children from multiple different fathers and then drain the state of its resources at the expense of taxpayers like you and I.

    0|2
    0|0
  • You lost all my respect in the first paragraph. "it is wrong to abort or prevent a pregnancy"
    I didn't know such a ridiculous sentence existed, but then I should stop being surprised by the stupidity on this site.

    2|3
    1|1
  • Get your damned socialist hand out of my pocket.
    A better solution is to stop using welfare to pay the poor, retarded and infirm to breed.
    If you cannot feed it, do not breed it.
    If you breed it and cannot feed it, that is not and should never be my problem.

    0|1
    0|0
  • The concept of paying other people to essentially just fuck around, literally, is ludacris in my opinion.

    0|1
    0|0
    • You'd rather people in lower socioeconomic areas reproduce, and have high odds of becoming criminals and social degenerates? Yeah that's smart 😂

    • @Prof_Don I'd rather money be spent on better sex-education.

  • Birth control isn't a right. You don't want kids and have no birth control? Easy, don't have sex.

    2|3
    0|0
  • No they shouldn't. Our government and society has too
    GODDAMN entitlement giveaways. Stupid (retarded) and the like should
    be sterilized. Otherwise they will be an enormous burden on an already
    over utilized heath care system. Thereby rendering it more ineffective.

    1|2
    0|0
  • The only arias of the world where the population is actually growing is in impoverished places like the Middle East and Africa. Good luck getting a handle on that mess. FYI, in first world countries, including America, all of Europe, Russia, Japan, Australia and even China are already in a death spiral of dangerously low birth rates. That's why our countries are now being invaded by third world immigration. Every government needs a growing tax base so if the native population stops having children than they'll fill in the baby deficit by bringing in foreigners from third word countries.

    This My Take is so full of shit, and on so many levels, that I don't even know where to begin...

    0|1
    0|0
  • No, "poor people" should be tought why they should control themselves. Education is much more powerful than control.

    1|4
    1|0
    • this is the obvious truth. Education is where everything starts

    • Look at all the winning people out there just pissed off at the rich. Even tho all of us have the same opportunity to make something out of yourself in this country , actually the whole world. I agree with your opinion. I wasn't born with a silver spoon up my ass , but after working hard to make my dream come true , it happened. Now everybody poor wants all my silver spoons... lmao

  • "If stupid people breed the most, then the future will be full of stupid people."

    You know what makes stupid people? Lack of education.

    Put MORE (or even the same) money into educating poor people than rich people, and you'll have a more educated populous.

    0|2
    0|0
    • You really love to spend other people's money on irresponsible people.

    • Show All
    • @cipher42 stop addressing me.

    • @Rissyanne What's wrong? Are you such a delicate special snowflake that you can't deal with opposing opinions? Too sensitive? Honestly, how you maintain such incredible hypocritical doublethink astounds me. In any case, no I won't stop addressing you, I'm too petty for that. Mute the question or stop replying, no one's forcing you to talk to me.

  • The founder of Planned Parenthood specifically desired to reduce the breeding of blacks. She had some success.

    As a rich person, I would be more philosophically interested in sterilization of any female as a condition of receiving any form of welfare, starting at age 15.

    1|0
    2|0
  • Nopes. Let stupid people have kids. If their kids starve to death its their problem. The ones that make it deserve to live. Nature. I say let them have kids but no additional health care or help from the state. Im not gonna pay the pills so little Tom fucks his cousin.

    1|1
    0|2
  • With a tiered income tax, the "rich" people are already paying for way more than "poor" folks. Condoms are a necessity, birth control are not. Quality condoms are free of charge in any pharmacy around here.

    I wonder who's paid for that.. hmm.. the "rich" folks, I guess.

    0|1
    0|0
    • All tax is paid by poor people. Only people you go to work in overalls create wealth, people who go to "work" in suits and ties create nothing, they're parasites stealing "Surplus Labour" from the workers, all the money they are paid, notice I didn't use the word "earn", all the money they are paid was earned by the labour of the poor slobs on the factory floor, wealth is only created through the application of manual labour to raw materials. Welfare is just returning some of the money those who controls the means of production stole from those who operate the means of production.

    • @Bezbozhnikustanka We live in different economies by the sound of it.

  • all i see is a wall of text... in short all i really read was:

    "im too poor to afford my own BC so somebody should pay for me"

    fuk that. if rich people should have to pay for BC, then the poor people should have to work for them for dirt cheap. you want to save money? so do i. and the answer too poor people and poverty isn't more social welfare.

    1|0
    0|0
  • More from Guys
    34

What Girls Said 17

  • In Australia, we already do.
    The majority of commonly used and necessary medications are subsidised and paid for by the government taken in through taxes.
    For a low income earner (someone on benefits) they pay $6.30 per prescription, a pill prescription is generally for 3-4 months.
    An average person will pay $38.80 per prescription with the rest of the cost still subsidised (it shows on the stickers how much you've "saved" like below).

    Honestly I think it's great. It means people don't have to struggle when it comes to the choice of preventing pregnancy, abortion and raising a child on benefit. Really, what's going to be more expensive to tax payers - a few hundred dollars on birth control per person or hundreds of thousands in welfare for both the child and mother in a continuous family cycle?

    0|1
    0|1
    • Well, there is always starvation. The mother and child can starve to death and not use welfare. :D

      That brings down 2 people instead of 1.

  • 'Humans don't need birth control or health care'. Wrong!. This is so an opinion given by a middle/upper class brat! I can't believe ANYONE would be so cruel, as to let someone go without medical attention, if sick, or die, if they can't afford medical. Clearly, you are American!

    1|1
    0|2
    • If humans need birth control, then would you concede that rapists need sex and therefore cannot be held accountable for their crimes? Because this is where your sort of thinking leads to. Either human beings are capable of self control and restraint or they are not. You cannot have it both ways.

    • Come the revolution his entire class will be up against a wall, blindfold, last cigarette BOP! BOP! BOP! as Wolfie Smith used to say.

  • No, they shouldn't. Keep your legs closed or get condoms if you aren't ready for kids. Rich people are not responsible for poor people's dumb decisions.

    1|2
    0|1
  • Actually in UK we have single mothers getting benefits for having children.

    I have noticed the trend where intelligent people reproduce less children.

    :-I I kind of agree with this post but no one should pay for someone else's contraception.

    0|0
    0|1
  • Well we do need healthcare, we should be helping the sick and needy but as far as birth control, its not needed and nobody should be paying for it. Birth control shouldn't even be a thing, you want to prevent pregnancies? Then practice abstinence or safe sex.. but abstinence is 10X better and FREE. Then after your married and in a stable relationship, thats when you have kids, Nothing is taken out of anyone pockets if we just practice this.

    0|0
    1|5
    • What do you mean by safe sex? So in your opinion even when you're married you shouldn't use birth control? Every time you have sex you should just make another baby?

    • Show All
    • @BrittBratt2416, times changes and as long we've the technology to make birth controls I supports that people use it. With birth control it's a lesser chance of people getting unwanted children. It's possible to not have sex too. But we've the technology, so then you can get two things. Pleasure and avoid getting children.

    • @curiousnorway okay if that's what you want then pay for it

  • Have you had your tubes tied yet?

    0|0
    0|1
  • Birth control is a choice. You either choose to use it or not. If you choose to use it, you should pay for it yourself. Plain and simple.

    0|0
    0|1
  • I need birth control for the hormones.
    I need birth control to help my terrible cramps.
    I need birth control to lighten my period.
    Plus the added bonus of not getting pregnant (99.9%).

    0|0
    0|2
  • Ok at first I got annoyed. A bit frustrated. Then I started laughing. Good one.

    1|0
    1|1
  • I wish the government would stay the hell out of the bedroom.

    0|0
    0|1
  • Agreed! The rich get the tax break and we're back to back alley abortions👍

    0|0
    0|1
  • Lol interesting point of view

    0|0
    0|1
  • No. People should be responbilkty for their own needs

    0|0
    0|1
  • I absolutely agree the rich should pay way more then just this

    0|0
    0|2
  • I only agreed with the headline. The rest of this is disgusting.

    1|0
    0|0
  • they don't pay

    0|0
    0|1
  • I said they should move their ass and work. I'm not giving my money for any lazy people.

    0|0
    0|1
    • You work for a you're, your boss pays you for 30 minutes and he pays the share holders for the other 30 minutes, the share holders are lazy, parasitic trust fund brats who've never done a day's work in their lives. How do you feel about that?

    • You work for an hour... autocorrect again. You press one wrong letter and it comes up with a whole different word.

    • @Bezbozhnikustanka I don't understand anything. Be clear.

Loading... ;