Is having a 1-2 child policy world wide, a solution to over population?

[Warmapplecrumble]

Yes

No

Updates

+1 y

You cannot compare China's 1 child policy to 2 child policy.

[freakyzeaky]

Only certain countries and cultures have a population that pumps out more than an average of 2 children per family. Islamic nations have a very high rate of like 8 children per family on average. India and China of course historically have high birth rates too. But Europe is actually in a crisis when it comes to reproduction. The culture in Europe is not sustainable at its current rate of like 1.2 - 1.5 children per family. Even the US is dangerously close to a point of no return at 1.6 and the only reason it is even that high is due to the influx of Hispanic immigrants.

[Warmapplecrumble]

That trend is very true in UK. Now I am not sure if its the lifestyle causing decline in fertility or by choice or both.

Not many Caucasians are having enough children. So balance would help.

[ladsin]

Sounds like a massive violation of rights, and a nightmare to legislate. What would you do? Murder children if they're the third?

I agree that people should have less kids, but that has to be their own decision, not some law or mandate.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Well if there is a reasonable reason then nothing, but if it isn't then they should be taxed higher.

[ladsin]

Next thing you know you'll be trying to tax the air people breath -.-

[Warmapplecrumble]

Well if you don't follow law you get punished.

For example if you drive super fast and get caught you get a fine.

If these people break the law... they should get punished too.

[ladsin]

Like I said, that law would be a major violation of basic human rights. It would be terrifying to live in a word where the government had a say in what we could do with our own reproductive organs. What if they then decide what we get to do with our other organs. I hope no government ever has that much authority.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Government already owns you.

[ladsin]

The government doesn't decide what I get to do with my sex or other organs.

[Warmapplecrumble]

In the UK if you die your organs are automatically donated, unless you opt out.

Government already has some control.

[ladsin]

After I'm dead is different than while I'm living, even if that's the case they allow you to opt out. That still allows for bodily rights, it just appears to be a fail safe in case you die before you can sign up to be an organ donor.

[strangytie]

The Mormons would never go for that. Look at China, it may have decreased the population but they also have female infanticide and people used illegal drugs to have twins or triplets or more per single birth.

[DevikaButts95]

Yes it is factually a solution. It will solve overpopulation, or at least prevent the population from getting even more out of hand. Doesn't necessarily mean it's a good solution tho.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Why do you think it's bad solution/what are disadvantages to it?

[DevikaButts95]

I didn't say it was bad. But really it's just hard to uphold it morally.

[gwail]

Even in countries with a one child policy people still have more kids they just don't register them. So they are technically illegal resistance or non nationality holders.

[MlleCake]

Government needs to stay the fuck out of reproduction.

[TheKidFromBrooklyn]

The only people who would follow it are the people who have a conscience, have the ability to worry about consequences, and actually follow the law. These are precisely the kinds of people that you want to be having kids. And this is irrespective of the effect a policy like this could have in social structure. If you want to fix overpopulation, make the next generation smarter, and better educated than we are, so they might actually have a chance of coming up with effective policies of countering it. You don't do that by de-incentivizing all the smartest people from having kids.

[Warmapplecrumble]

How do you have more smart children when people with higher IQ's are choosing to not have children or very little children?

[TheKidFromBrooklyn]

If you press all intelligent women into the workforce at an early age, you are not creating a very reproduction friendly environment. Right now, the women who are reproducing at the highest rates seem to be the ones on welfare. You tax the people that are actually productive, forcing them to work harder, and you use the money to subsidize the poor decisions of low income earners. Intelligent people have kids when they can look around, and see that the environment supports having kids. When they can see that it's a viable option. Allowing the free market to do its job, the most intelligent, conscientious people rise to the top, and have more ability to reproduce.

[Warmapplecrumble]

If women didn't work, then each house hold would be taxed less and more jobs will be available, and more time to look after children and help in communities.

[TheKidFromBrooklyn]

I agree. And I think this is the reproduction strategy that led us through thousands of years of progressive evolution, discontinuing it without logical reason or sense is going to have some negative consequences.

[MackToday]

People in third world countries will choose male children over female. It leads to female children being starved, aborted etc. After a while you end up with few females and many more males. A horny sexually frustrated mass of military age men is a good way to reduce the population on earth in general.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Should be laws against that, and heavy fines.

[MackToday]

Won't do any good especially in a corrupt third world country.

[Warmapplecrumble]

:-/ that's sad they rather produce too many children and starve them, then having 2 or less.

[MackToday]

It's more like they prefer male children and if they have to make a choice they'd rather have two boys.

[Warmapplecrumble]

... well that's to do with the way women are seen as scum in these countries.

[LegateLanius]

It's never going to be able to be a thing that all governments can do nor enforce. Its a solution but that would screw over China completely.
The better thing to do would be to work on making a plant that can grow in low fertile environments or other research into sustainable foods - maybe even making some sort of refined food made of arthropods - specifically all of the smaller bugs.
Another solution is to move more people to different areas, there are plenty of spaces left to fill in both Russia and USA for example.

[Himig_Ng_Pag-ibig]

Nope! it isn't... If we look at the statistics, the peak for young people's aged had already been achieved while the overall human population peak is estimated to peak around year 2045-2055. That's not far at all... Furthermore the average fertility rate worldwide is 2.4 and that will go down in the coming years..

[Warmapplecrumble]

What I am noticing is fertility levels are declining very fast but, people with a higher IQ are having less and less children and people on welfare are having 10 or more.

[Himig_Ng_Pag-ibig]

Right and a 1-2 child policy is not a solution for lower income family having kids... Overpopulation means the the local jurisdiction (like a city) cannot provide adequate resources, wealth and services among sectors of the population..
Hence it results in poverty (shanty towns, ghettos etc), lack of healthcare and especially lack of education which then leads to lack of employment opportunity... This gives gives the rise in them having more children because of lack of sexual education, lack of career desire and boredom (as weird as it is, it showed there was a rise in sex and birth rate during the recession years).

in my opinion part of the solution is to create more wealth, betterment of economy and that wealth and services shall be distributed fairly to the citizen. Also the important thing is manage the population density. If we look at the world, it is the big cities that suffers most from overpopulation.

[Warmapplecrumble]

I don't think everyone becomes better with education. Some people with education still choose to do things that are very silly.

I think its influence of other people around them and being accepted in a community.

[Himig_Ng_Pag-ibig]

Given with your solution of 1-2 child policy that violates multiple individual rights and freedom, I'd stick for giving people access to education and create more wealth not forcefully reduce population (especially when the rate is already slowing down)

[TadCurious]

It would most definitely help. But the most effective way to get there (and this has been shown over and over) is to increase the economic, educational and social opportunities for girls and women. Where women in the developing world gain economic opportunity and education, they have fewer children, and they have more options for birth control.

[animus1988]

Wrong. The more money people have the more kids they have. There is also a correlation with poverty. Both rich and poor generally have bigger families

[TadCurious]

@animus1988 You couldn't be more mistaken. The countries that rank highest on the Human Development Index (i. e., the wealthiest, most developed countries) have fewer births per woman than do the poorest, least developed countries.

[Kuraj]

Overpopulation is exclusively a third world problem and I doubt those cultures are very good at following regulations.

I think more realistic solution is for first world to refuse immigrants from overpopulating countries.
Socioeconomic collapse and famine will solve the situation there eventually.

[Kkaos]

I think it's a great idea. Why do people need more than 2 children? What's their reason? Half the parents I see with mass numbers of children are also the parents from low socio-economic backgrounds who can barely even afford to raise them.

[Warmapplecrumble]

I agree,

[Anonymous]

If that happens well that's depressing.
But yeah it's not a good solution cause we have plenty of room on this earth, no such thing as over population.

[Opinion Owner]

by the way I want 3+ so that policy wouldn't work for me

[Opinion Owner]

lol...

[SnapTsch]

We have plenty of room, miss
But we don't have enough resources for all.
Also just existing is pointless if there is no quality of life

[Warmapplecrumble]

@SnapTsch agree

[N192K001]

Actually, the argument of dangerously low resources was proposed by Thomas Malthus and was actually wrong. According to his work from 1789, we should have long reached the resource limit, but he failed to take into account man’s ability to designate new resources from previously worthless, unusable things (like sand for silicone chips or petrol for internal combustion engines).

Ingenuity and market forces have more or less discredited the Malthusian theory.

[Potatocream]

No, overpopulation won't be a problem. Once countries start developing they end up with fewer and fewer babies. You see the trend in developed countries already like here in Germany where our population is shrinking

[Krumpir]

Not 1 because look at the China... They basically killed their entire generation with 1 child policy. Everyone wanted a son.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Yeah that's why I think 1-2 child is good because that gives people option to have none, one or two.

[Krumpir]

Do you want 0-1-2 kids?

[Warmapplecrumble]

Yeah I wouldn't have more than 2.

[anndramcin]

People live longer these days and have a lot of kids. My grandfather had 7 (two marriages after his first wife passed away).

People probably couldn't imagine living to nearly 100 in the early 20th century.

[Anonymous]

Children have continued to be born for all these thousands of years, and yet there's still vast area's of the World that have no people. The problem for older retired people is that there has been far too FEW children being allowed to be born, to support the continued issuance of Social Security that older people have PAID-INTO all their working lives

[kitjo]

It's an excellent idea for Africa and India, probably a necessary idea for China. Definitely should not be imposed on the race that's driven civilisation for the past couple of thousand years: Europeans.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like it would be but it ended up screwing China over so I'd say no.

Also are our governments all prepared to provide contraceptive services to everyone? If no gtfo of my business

[RBasim]

Around the world? I would not agree! But for those regions where the population is high. I would say that it should be upto two for those countries. Otherwise 3 gonna work better. You never know the loss of life due to any event! :/

[Nahid1234]

Yea, i want two children in the future, a son and a daughter ideally.
i don’t see why having many children would be a good thing.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Same :)

[Nahid1234]

Lucky me, you replied back to me. ☺️💕

[Warmapplecrumble]

lol thanks

[Nahid1234]

You’re welcome.

[DanOh2018]

No, it won't really solve anything. Only good people follow the law. So you are effectively giving good people an evolutionary disadvantage lol

[DanOh2018]

Same reason that birth control use results in a proliferation of idiots. The smart people use it and the others don't. Hence the intelligent get outbred.

[Warmapplecrumble]

Well its already happening hence we need laws to get non intelligent people to stop breeding at pace of 20 children...

[B2785]

This policy is too intrusive in the natural rights & functions of people. However those who want to voluntarily render themselves incapable of reproducing is another matter, as long as it's not a government mandate.

[mac_daddy416]

When for created earth obviously he knew how much people it could bare. So we need to stop worrying about world population and worry more about world monopoly. Where one or two countries want own everything. Cause rest of humanity to go hungry.

[Kgbmafia]

yes xD some people be popping out 5 kids at once like wtf haha