You are right. It happens here in the USA too. People who cannot afford children, and in many cases who don't know how to create or raise healthy, happy children, have them anyway, and then the rest of us have to support the parents and their children financially via our taxes. I propose free contraception for all people, rather than paying people to have babies when the earth is already full of humans.

I really don't understand how people keep confusing Monsanto with a Captain Planet supervillain. Judging from some of this lunacy, their CEO is an insane clone of Hitler.

So far I've heard that they're sterilizing people (thanks, Sharktopussie!), driving farmers off their land, suing people who don't use their products for using their products, killing poor people for giggles, killing regular people because who knows, and making super viruses to exterminate all agriculture not developed by then. I expect they'll unveil their Death Star any month now.

Really, how do you nutcases take this seriously?

I don't think China's policy is as bad as it sounds. If you can afford to have more than one child, you certainly are able to but you have to pay hefty fines. In fact, I know several families in mainland China that have 3 children.

Sadly, abortion clinics must be huge there.

Go.discovery - that's right and if you're the child of a one child family and marry another person who is the offspring of a one child family then you and your spouse can have multiple children. There is a lot of false information out there about the one child policy that is propagated by adoption agencies within China so that they can continue to literally sell children to foreigners who believe they are saving poor unwanted offspring. That's not to say every adoption from China is like that but it is a known fraud issue in China.

Ad at the end of the day at least China is being realistic and managing for the future in at least this area.

wish south america was more like china...less chop sticks crossing the border...if you know what i mean ...

One child policy is only for the non Han chinese so that they can take over the world !>= )

Very little to do with population limiting. Their hope is that Chinese citizens move to the US, Britain, AU, RU, etc and spread. Let them grow large successful communities in those lands that will eventually elect Chinese leaders there locally, and then put in place China favorable trading policies.

Think about it. Why have no serious EPA or labor laws in China? They want people to leave knowing full well by the time it gets its act together, they'll esentially be running large parts of other peoples countries.

It's a "natual insurection".

What if the family has enough money to become a birther in other countries? they can say that their baby is not Chinese citizen.

This is a good thing. EVERY country in the world SHOULD enforce such laws until the world population is down to MAYBE 1 billion. I think even 1 billion is probably too high just because of the people live. 7 billion is a ludicris number of people. The damage this is causing is obvious, and it is going to get worse at an exponential rate. And as for the gmo food people, yeah right now gmo food causing cancer and sterility is a GOOD thing. I dont like them and dont support them, but the truth is sometimes hard to deal with. The truth now is that a bare minimum of 6 billion people need to go before the world can get better, otherwise the future will continue to get bleaker until there is no future.

That or we kill off some of the lesser children via natural selection. Have contests or rights of passage into certain age groups. Run across the field and avoid the lion, or have some inteletual ones that kill you if you get so many answers wrong...something.

We could have separate test for men and women too so that the numbers are close to being equal. If anything we should have slightly more women then men. I just do not want men to become like ants one day and only used for reproduction which is what some women seem to want with all the neutering going on in this country.

The amount of money that one has is a poor factor in determening how good one's genes are, yet that is all many women is this country care about. It is the number one thing they look for in a man and you wonder why our country is f***ed up.

@DP "Think about it. Why have no serious EPA or labor laws in China?"

Ummm so that companies will agree to the conditions the government forces them to and move factories to China. That way China gets more technology, experience, and money. Why are some states "right to
work" maybe to attract business from states that actually protect and pay their workers. So that the company pays less in taxes overall while the people and our government get less. It is called shooting yourself in the foot.

One kid..one egg roll..one bowl of rice..and one nuke per family..that's it!

mike-2598123 - you forgot to include Americans in your list.

If you have to follow up your own post with "stating facts is not racist's !" then you already know your faux pa. So why even say it?

Everybody screams about China's "One Child" policy because many Chinese will kill their child if it is a girl. China's "One Child" policy is brave. What they need to change is their laws and traditions on women in general. As it is, the child must be a male to have a chance at success. Without that, couples could have either a boy or a girl and be supremely happy. At least the Chinese are doing something about the exponential growth of the world's population.

Now if someone could just do something about these idiot "reality show" families. Talk about a disgrace. Idiots producing more idiots. GREAT!!

China, you may as well make it a "no-child" policy for all the good it's doing.

People still have more than one child. Humans are very creative.

.

I'm surprised that China hasn't resorted to gassing entire cities to help curb their population problems.

With idiots like Mike, who needs a foreign invasion !

One thing that many miss with this type of policy is the generations of those that will never have cousins or aunts or uncles. That's sad - but easy family reunions to plan...and one kid wins all the games!

I don't know why people get so upset about abortion. Fetuses are like Doritos. Crunch all you want. They'll make more.

Too bad that didn't happen to you when you were a fetus Spencer.. crunch crunch moron.

Personally I think this is a great idea for this country. If you are on welfare then the government should REQUIRE you to use birth control. If you can't afford to support the kids you have, you shouldn't be allowed to produce any more.

what taking the US so long for this type of law? we dont have enough food and are in a recssion and need less people. America is the country of immigrants yet it had 300 million people already. the east coast is filled and way to many women on welfare. we need 1 child only law or 10-15 years from now we as a nation are in big trouble. what is talking our polticans so long?

One thing to say to all the anti-abortionists: Put your $$$ where your mouth is and ADOPT.

I believe its a good policy. The US should adopt a licensing policy. The perspective parent needs to prove they can support and care for a child before allowed to procreate. Hefty fines and jail for offenders with the resultant children put up for adoption.

@ Mike-2889620

Wow would that policy backfire! We already have an over-crowded foster-care system and prisons and wards of the state. Your policy would likely increase all of these exponentially in an effort to fight against a problem that really doesn't exist.

Also, if you care to read some of the latest statistics, the US's birth-rates are actually just barely holding steady, largely propped up by the higher rates among immigrants and some minorities. Europe, Japan, Korea and most of the developed world are actually reproducing at a much slower rate...there is going to be a shrinking in the population, not growth.

Also, the Chinese population is headed for a major bust due to both an aggregate greying population much like Japan's, but the 1-child policy there has also led many people to opt for selectively aborting their girl-babies due to a cultural favoritism for boys. This will result in roughly 17% of the Chinese male-population unable to find a female within china (roughly 100 women for every 120 men by year 2020).

India, the other country with an insanely large population is also a major fan of selective abortions of girls, resulting in 7.1 million more boys than girls under age 6 as of 2011.

Both of these countries are going to face a massive population implosion as they find themselves with many more men unable to find a mate and many among them without the resources to travel abroad to do so or to attract one of the few that live within the country. This is a major national security issue...particularly since both China and India are nuclear-armed and both with a very large socio-economic disparity to go along with it...it's a recipe for civil unrest and maybe even revolution.

Fertility levels fall naturally as states modernize and become wealthier. Japan and South Korea's populations are both shrinking without any one-child laws (and in fact they're worried about population depletion). China is vigorously applying a solution in want of a problem.

I've heard that and I've heard that in theory our worlds population will stabilize at around 11 Billion or something because of it. But are we sure that we can create sustainability with a population at that level? Are we positive that it will go that way and can we afford to take the risk?

We can hope it all works out but... I'd feel better with a bit more study and planning.

Better studying and planning is a fantastic idea, along with further development and more efficient technologies.

Draconian reproductive mandates are the bluntest, most wretched methods of dealing with the issue.

Right now the biggest source of population growth is Africa, and even that is starting to slow as resistance to family planning and birth control is becoming less common. More to point, countries that are actually trying to BOOST their fertility rates are meeting with very little success.

Rather than being concerned with overpopulation, it makes far more sense (and ensures a happier outcome) if we commit ourselves to better resource management.

China's 1-child policy also has a serious side-effect.

Chinese people have been selectively preferring boys over girls for several decades now. The result of which has established a very serious and unbalanced gender ratio of about 100 woman for every 120 men.

What this means is that in the coming decade, 20 out of 100 men, or roughly 17% of China's projected 2020 population (where the gender gap will reach it's highest apex) will need to leave the country to find a woman (unless China is able to absorb more women from elsewhere in the world to fill this void.

China is a VERY big country with a very polarized socio-economic hierarchy, it means that the men with the least amount of wealth/resources will find themselves less likely to find a mate in general as the wealthier and more connected will be better equipped to look outwards, and be more attractive in general.

Just think of what kind of effect that will have on the population and China's national security and stability. Approximately 23.1 million men in China will find themselves unable to reproduce and live in a country where they don't have the means to attract a mate or leave to find one...while those that do, will.

SF the fact that koreas population is shrinking probably has a lot to with the number of them moving to other countries and the fact that most asian people have a much greater deal of self control. Those are things the US will never have.

For those of you talking stabilizing population and resource control, no that will not work. For the population to stabilize people either have to only have one kid per person who dies. That will never happen if people keep having three or more kids and people keep saving everyone who wouldve died and prolonging lives of people well past a natural life span. As for resource control, as we sit with 7 billion the strain on fresh water supplies is already VERY apparent. Where I live the poudre river is already down to a trickle by the time it gets out of the mountains. The resevoirs are practically empty by the end of summer and there are TONS of them around here. And in the increasing frequency of years we dont get a "normal" amount of snowfall the resevoirs dont get filled back up. This year we have had a record lack of precipitation. In fact we normally get an average 400" worth of total snowfall statewide, but this year we dont even have 150". If 7 billion people is @!$%#ing up the world to that extent already we DO NOT HAVE ROOM for another billion.

Zen, you have a valid point just substitute the words taxes for babies and spending for the remainder of your post.great job well done

I agree with you Brandon-

And I also agree with SF on how government shouldn't control our family life; but at the same time something needs to be done IF people continue to just pop babies out like nothing. People don't realize how much overpopulation affects them as well as their child's future. Earth's resources can't keep up with the population. I'd rather have some control now (preferably people just being smart and quit having 309834 babies) so if I ever decide to have a child I will know he/she won't go hungry in their future.

Everyone should read A Mother's Ordeal: One Woman's Fight Against China's One-Child Policy before passing judgement on China's One-Child Policy. The policy may have been well intended, but the way it has been carried out (and is carried out to this day) is horrific and most definitiely will have a long lasting effect on the psychology and emotional well being of the Chinese people. The worst part is the toll the policy has taken on the female population. Girl babies are undesirable, and even though a mother may want a baby girl with all her heart, she knows she must produce a boy. The sad truth is that China created this problem of "too many people, not enough resources" under Mao Zedong's three decades of rule. Read the book; it will open your eyes.

Seriously, I'm not sure about Chinese per se' but more males are born per capita in this country, but males also have a higher mortality rate than females so their chances of reaching maturity is lower.

I'm not sure if that works the same in China or not.

@ Janine-1645002

The Chinese are most definitely selectively aborting girl babies in favor of producing boy babies. The only place worse by comparison is India.

But you are indeed correct, the statistical probability of producing a boy is greater than producing a girl. However your assumption that Chinese babies (or just their boys) just have a lower mortality rate than the rest of the developed world's, hence why China has a shockingly larger number of males:females ratio is incorrect.

If you think the planet is too croweded, feel free to leave.

Nobody should have control of our right to reproduce. Overpopulation is a vague term full of useless guesses and hollow logic; nobody knows the carrying capacity of the Earth.

SF, your comment leads me to believe you've never been to China or understand Chinese culture. China's large population is a very serious problem for its economy, quality of life, and most importantly to me, the environment. The pollution that results from overpopulation is horrendous. I'm still stunned and appreciative of being able to see a clear blue sky when I return to the US after being in China for a few months. And their pollution problems affect neighboring countries as well. I, too, wish there were alternative solutions but there aren't, especially in a culture where having multiple children is traditionally considered a sign of prosperity and good fortune.

All of that happened in spite of the one-child policy. Besides, what China wants to do to its own people is its business; I don't have a problem with their self-destructive foolishness. They're just trading one problem for another.

What I object to is people praising this draconian rubbish, suggesting that ALL our governments should run our lives to the point of planning our families for us. It not only shows a severe lack of appreciation for basic freedoms, but also shows a lack of understanding of statistics and trend analysis.

Meant to say that the one-child policy hasn't prevented any of that, not that it hasn't helped (it is a rather long-term solution); for all I know it might help once this generation starts dying off, but I wouldn't want to be there to find out.

The one-child policy, while I acknowledge its flaws, has still helped curb some of the negative effects of overpopulation. I shiver at the thought of how conditions would be currently if the Chinese gov't didn't enact the law 30 years ago. Ideally, I agree that reproductive rights should be outside of any gov't control, but ultimately, I believe gov't exists to protect its people. And this policy is protecting the Chinese people from poverty, diseases, etc.

Or maybe prior to that Mao should not have urged everyone to overpopulate and have huge families creating the problem.

As for protecting it's people, what about all the girls that are never born or are discarded to orphanages? No I'm not speculating, I'm talking about what you see walking down the street in China, a generation with noticably few females.

And again, that's fine for China, I guess. They'll have to live with the consequences, not me.

I for one think governments exist to SERVE the people. It's far too easy for those in power to abuse it in the name of "protection", so that's a definition I abhor. Especially when those in power are "protecting" you from yourself.

And that next generation, or two, will learn to appreciate those women, wont they. (not a question)

I have ONE child. Why? Because one child was all I could afford (at the time) to give a good, solid, middle class life to. I've never understood people who have more children than they can afford and HOPE that their circumstances improve. It usually doesn't...

Kiru;

Good point and one that I don't know if many Americans understand.

I actually don't have a problem with having only one child--it does statistically address reduce the population long-term, though at a certain point when they reach what the government considers a sustainable, stable population then 2 children will be mandatory to maintain a steady population that neither rises nor drops.

One of the problems I have with China's one-child policy is that it is gender-biased and unevenly applied to the population. The very poor out in rural areas can have more than one, reasoning here that they nave more than one child to work the fields; the very wealthy can afford to pay the fines and penalties if they have a second child; it's the middle class who find themselves limited in children.

The other problem I have with the one-child policy is that it is very heavily gender-biased. Practically every abortion performed is on girls; very few boys are aborted. This is rooted in the cultural concept that the boy can go to work and provide support for aged/elderly parents, and girls cannot--she becomes the support of her husband's family, not her own. I think I read somewhere that there are 30 million more boys than girls in the country, and the gender imbalance is leading to an increase in illegal human trafficking--specifically, baby girls from other Asian countries to China, where they are then bought by the wealthy and raised up to marry the scion of the house. At its very core it is sexual slavery, and sexual slavery and human trafficking is everyone's problem.

This isn't going to lead to the newer generation respecting women--a 'pure' Chinese woman is going to become a 'black market commodity' on the marriage market. A Chinese male who wants to uphold his family's status will seek to marry this woman, but if there is a lot of competition, the alternative will be to rape her and get her pregnant. Since a daughter pregnant without being married brings 'shame' to hr family, she could (and usually is) forced to marry the one who got her pregnant. This objectifies her, reducing her to simply being a baby-carrying machine and bringing the man who weds her higher social status.

I completely agree, Angela LD. I have one child because I can afford one child. There is no easy solution to the overpopulation proplem, or the problem of unwanted children, or the problem of unsupported children, but at least China is trying. Are there issues? Yes. Here in the US we can have as many children as we like and some crazies have 14+ kids! There is no justifiable reason for 14 children, in my opinion. I wish there was a law here in the US that put a restriction on how many children each man and/or woman can have, or a means test to have a child or something, but there isn't and there won't be so we'll all pay the price. Like I said, there is no easy solution or even one solution, but at least the Chinese have recognized a problem and are trying to deal with it.

@ Brubeck

China's 1-child policy is a ticking timebomb for their economy and national security. They have a massive, aging population and a serious gender-gap that is going to ensure that another 17%+ of their people will be unable to reproduce for lack of finding a mate.

I understand your concern about over-population and pollution, but you need to keep in mind that China's pollution has less to do with their population and much much more to do with the fact that they have manipulated their currency so that they could secure themselves as the cheap-labor sink-hole for attracting all things manufacturing and heavy-industry from other nations. In essence, the US and EU have exported both low-skill manufacturing jobs, as well as the associated pollution that came with that business.

Compound this with the fact that China is both not as technologically advanced as the US in terms of efficient use of resources...but more importantly...China doesn't WANT TO BE

China erects more coal fired power plants than nuclear ones or gas-ones because Coal-power is incredibly labor intensive...you need miners, you need shippers, you need storage, and you need people to work the plants. Gas and Nuclear power are far more automated...China needs to create jobs for its people...so they go with the less efficient rout if it means that they can generate a salary for a few million more people.

Aside from coal, see also steel and rubber industrial plants. They've saturated the market in an effort to create jobs, they care more about finding and creating employment for their people than the pollution that it causes...not to mention the long-term economic bubble that they're precariously balancing atop of...but that's a whole other story

Angela, to be fair to the Chinese, women do OK there.. or at least relatively well compared with most other developing countries. There are few career impediments anymore, for example, and sexual violence is now - as opposed to previous generations - seemingly under control. Their problem is the cultural/quasi-religious desire to perpetuate the family name through a male child.. that leads to selective abortion among some (big) parts of the population.

Women are not well represented at the most senior levels of government, however. But then again, I'm still pretty sure they have proportionately more or as many women at those levels than we do here in the US. The binders of women are still on the shelves in both countries.

My only comment to the "Nobody should have control of our right to reproduce." statement is that no one has the right to tell me that I have to raise your kid financially. I'm so sick and tired of people abusing the "RIGHT" to have kids that it's impeding on my "RIGHT" to NOT pay for a bunch of @!$%#ing kids.

population growth is already slowing in developed countries that's because of more empowered women and easy contraception access

CaliforniaFirst,

Perhaps, but if the 'women (females) do okay', then why are THEY the children that are aborted (I'm pro-choice, for the record), thrown in orphanages or left out to the elements to die, rather than male children? I think China still has a patriarchy system set, but I agree it is changing.

Truthfully, I will admit I don't know too much about China after the communist took over (although I do know some about its history), or it's modern traditions, this article and your post have made me curious to learn more. Thanks.

Angela, here's a good article on the situation of women in China.. the good and the bad.

http://www.economist.com/node/21539931

Don't know where you live, but here in Denver it is very fashionable to have kids... mainly by girls who are kids themselves. Then they drop out of school, have another 2, 4 or 9 kids, and we get to pay for them. So yeah, in some places it is simply fashionable.

And the world is way overpopulated... not saying that we couldn't support more humans on the planet, just that everyone's quality of life goes to hell. And as far as the US is concerned, I wouldn't advocate mandatory policies, just change a few antiquated tax laws, like being able to write off all of your 14 little dependants. Have people pay for their own families. Oh, and take away welfare checks when momma has her 3rd or 4th kid.

The welfare check should be taken away after the first child reaches 1 years old.After that people should be on their own to support their children.That is one way the U.S. can cut down on the population.

I agree...I think if people knew they weren't going to get all this money for having children they would be more careful (I'd hope so atleast). I believe people should support themselves and their own children. I'm sick of my taxes going towards welfare and other stuff like it to support people who don't want to support themselves!

Fashionable? Having kids here has nothing to do with "fashion" or "trends" or any of that. Fashionable? SERIOUSLY? Find another word, My God.

I agree with crackyjoe. I looked up a map, with blue and pink, all over the world. Right now, blue(boys) is the majority. But if you fast forward the map a few years, the MAJORITY of it becomes pink(girls). These are the predictions of birth rates and sexes, and it's not surprising..

China can try to meddle with nature all it wants, but there will ALWAYS be female vessels for future generations.

You hear about control freak people...can you say control freak COUNTRY? And they wonder why so many Chinese citizens come to America.

Actually, having a child has not become "fashionable". Rather, our fertility rate has declined in the past few centuries, such that our population growth is being almost completely fueled by immigration (immigrants tend to have more children). Additionally, there's no indication that America is anywhere near "full". So I say keep 'em coming.

And just let an American politician try to tell his/her people that they're thinking of a government population control policy. They'll be burned in effigy. But only if they manage to run fast enough...

We're going broke invading and occupying other countries who aren't a threat to us. Very little of your tax money ends up helping poor children, so you shouldn't worry.

BS! People aren't having kids to be fashionable, it's a natural part of life. If you don't want to have any PLEASE DON'T. We don't need anymore of you.

And thank you very much, I was gainfully employed, married, and owned a house before having kids so stop generalizing everything you B. You aren't sexist, you are an idot.

@Andrea - "we are going BROKE supporting children who's parents can not, or will not, support them." - Then how do you explain the fact that the largest single government expenditure is Medicare (children paying taxes that go to pay for medical care for their parents)? Seems that you have this backwards.

Any argument about "why" we're going broke is flawed from the outset, because we're not going broke.

America has far more than enough resources to pay for all its programs and more. But just try passing the taxes necessary for the government to get them.

So we have the conundrum of wanting all these things the government offers, but God forbid we give up more of OUR paycheck to pay for it (because if that's the case, well, why even bother getting it through the state?). Hence the current financial tug-of-war.

I'm one of the semi-crazies. I have 5 children and would have as many children as God blesses us with. I have these babies because I refuse to murder my own children. I think THAT is crazy. There are too many people in this world who prefer their own luxuries over giving their own child life. Children are very expensive, but the majority of people choose vacations, fancy homes, nice cars, over giving their own beautiful miracles life. We choose to live a less expensive life in order to provide for our beautiful blessings. Of course, we do the best we can to avoid having children. We do not agree with any man-made techniques to avoid pregnancy. We do use protection that we do not have to put into our bodies. If we end up expecting, we will bless that child with life unless God decides otherwise.

People wonder why Social Security is running out. Well, years ago the average family size was much larger. Now all those children are grown and there are not enough children becoming working adults to provide for the Social Security of all those adults.

I do not believe in overpopulation. God knows what he is doing and would not put anybody here that he does not believe needs to be here. He will take those out when he sees fit. I refuse to have to answer for killing my own child. Shame on those women in China who allow this. I would be moving as fast as I could. The government will not answer for your actions when you are before God.

@Tdoru Congratulations it sounds like your children are being raised in a loving, caring home and as long as you are supporting your family without government assistance then it is noones business how many children you have.

"I do not believe in overpopulation. God knows what he is doing and would not put anybody here that he does not believe needs to be here. He will take those out when he sees fit. I refuse to have to answer for killing my own child." So even though God granted us the wisdom and methods to control our population, you deem that any intervention by you is thwarting God's will? I assume you do not engage in any medical procedures as that would be thwarting God's will, but do you eat anything other than bread and figs? Wouldn't consuming anything else be thwarting God's will? Especially if it contained anything artificial. Do you wear shoes? God did not put shoes on you at birth, isn't wearing shoes "thwrating god's will"? Or do you selective interpret what you want to follow and ignore the rest? Just curious.

Maybe we should require a minimum intelligence level along with your recommendation. Then we could do away with clueless idiots like yourself.

The U.S. birth rate slid by 8% in recent years, reaching 63.2 births per
1,000 women of childbearing age in 2011, according to a report
from the Pew Research Center. That is half the peak birth rate recorded in 1957,
which was smack in the middle of the baby boom. This is the lowest rate since at
least 1920, the earliest year for which there are reliable
numbers.

Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/12/04/birth-rate-plunges-during-recession/#ixzz2IB7wpYmx

But if we did that, no births would occur in the south for the next 20 years. Honey Boo Boo will be the last in her line.

Tdru,Social Security is going broke because money has been borrowed from it under two presidents.the other reason why it is going broke is to pay for Social Security Disability for those who can't work and worked very little contributing very little into it.those are the facts.As far as how many kids you have doesn't concern me as long as you are supporting them and not me,the taxpayer.

Tdoru; your following comment worries me:

I do not believe in overpopulation. God knows what he is doing and would not put anybody here that he does not believe needs to be here. He will take those out when he sees fit.

Why would God need the starving children, especially in Africa where they live in dire poverty, starving to death and dying from diseases because they do not receive medical care? He puts them here so they can suffer and die? Makes no sense if you believe God is merciful. If God controls every little thing that happens to us (not to say that He can't), then what is the point of life when he has already planned it all out?

If all your children were born with dibilitating disease that caused much suffering and robbed them of having any freedom from this before they died, I wonder if you would think that He had blessed your child.

I personally had 3 children (the 3rd after the 2nd was stillborn), and chose to wait to have them until I was in mid to late thirties so that I would be financially secure, and have the wisdom and maturity to be a good mother and provide well for them, including making it possible for them to complete a higher education so they can provide well for their children if and when the time comes.

What we need instead of requirements on how many kids you have, is good reproductive education (No, just because your religion says not to have sex doesn't mean you can keep information from your kids about their own bodies) and free birth control for all (with an emphasis on long-term methods). If you need government assistance, long-term birth control should be required- including deadbeat dads that don't support their kids.

For all those who don't want to use their tax money to give away birth control- a 5 year IUD costs hundreds. Giving birth costs thousands. Government assistance to raise a kid is what, tens of thousands over 18 years?

Fashionable. What the HELL kind of word is that to describe babies? My God, I've seen it twice now, it's SICKENING. Are you people THAT cynical?

You're all worse than me.

Demographic-wise, it also means that a lot of lonely Chinese men will be emigrating (taking skills and education with them), while those that can't will be of the lower rungs of society. Unskilled laborers who might not be able to find a job when the economy starts to dive, much less a girlfriend. We'll see how long their economic miracle lasts with that kind of unrest boiling under the lid.

Yes, I mean I seriously doubt that dirt poor Vietnamese, Laotian or other Asian women would want to move to China to have her pick of husband who, by their standards, would be very wealthy and, most likely, treat her relatively better. And certianly the Chinese government would not allow it and just watch their empire crumble. No way that would happen.

If China and the surrounding nations were that liberal in regards to immigration, no, it would not be a problem. At least, not for them. Alas, it's not that easy to just move into a foreign authoritarian nation in search of a spouse (especially not if you're dirt poor).

I am speaking 30 to 40 years from now...following on your hypothesis. Given the current trajectory of China, I would guess they we be somewhat more free/liberal and hyper-connected virtually. I would imagine that the majority of the population, including some hard-core communists (assuming they are still communist or at least allow the party to exist) and nationalist would still want a wife and given the dearth of women they will have, would allow and even encourage women to migrate to their country. It follows the same track they used to lure poor peasants into the factory jobs in the cities, granted they didn't have to try too hard to get the people to move initially. I could also see some sort of exchange with N. Korea, allowing women to migrate to China to get married. It usually takes something that affects people personally to get people to truly mobilize and a lack of women would affect many people. I could see the people pushing the government to allow a period of lax immigration on women as long as the men paid for it and seeing "mail-order" brides showing up from most of the surrounding regions....unless some of them become economic powers in their own right, but I assume many of them will remain poorer than China.

No, it wouldn't. We'd probably have more immigrants coming here specifically so that they can have kids.

I mean, if you have children somewhere else and then come into Mexico, what is the government going to do? Execute your extra kids for existing? At worst they can fine the parents (which will just encourage the illegal families to stay in America).

I'll never understand that about Mexicans. Just pumping out babies, one after the other. I don't care how offensive this is, their women are like timed machines.

you do know this would affect your daughter, like it or not.

Neither I or my daughter are on welfare. People like me don't pop out 8 children while unable to care for them.

I don't want the rest of the world learning anything from the oppressive fascist state of China. They've polluted their cities to the point that the air is unbreathable, they suffer constant protests and unrest, they execute more people than the rest of the world combined, they censor and manipulate all their news and information, and their political structure guarantees protection from the law for the elite. The Chinese people are abused, lied to, and fed desperate nationalism in order to distract from their difficulties. And then at the end of the day they can't even control how many children they have.

Oh, but they do have plenty of low-paying manufacturing jobs! Yeah, I'll bet that makes it all worth it.

SF, you sure do love relying on your government for your needs. You are being short sighted and not realizing that the worlds resources are depleting. While responsible people are having few children so save on resources, irresponsible ones are popping out multiple children knowing their government will take care of them.

Those rights you are so worried about won't mean sh&t when anarchy over resources begins. The world has reached a tipping point. This action from China isn't being implemented just because they feel like being tyrannical. We, and the rest of the world have the same problem. They are taking action. We are worried about rights.

Show me the tipping point. Where's the research? Where are the mining companies saying that they're closing because they have nothing to extract? Where are the oil companies going into refinement because there are no oil fields left? Where are the wars over water supplies?

Your assumption that we're at a tipping point is completely hollow; nothing suggests that we are. We can easily produce more food from the arable land we have. We can easily save a lot more water in places where modern irrigation techniques aren't used. We can less easily desalinate salt water, but we can do it. We have enormous fuel supplies undrilled and we just unleashed vast new supplies of gas with new technology.

So I see no reason to believe there will be any anarchy in the near future, which means that, yes, RIGHTS matter more than resources. China implements whatever policies it wants and feels are in its interests, because the government answers to no one; the fact that they did it means nothing. And you'd better believe that their people are worried about rights, not just "us".

Finally, what makes you think I rely on my government more than anyone else? I think the idea of population control is rubbish specifically BECAUSE I hate extensive government control of the population. If you think governments can run your life better than you can, that's on you. I'm not that weak.

"I don't want the rest of the world learning anything from the oppressive fascist state of The United States China. They've polluted their cities to the point that the air is unbreathable, they suffer constant protests and unrest, they execute more people than the rest of the world combined (excluding China), they censor and manipulate all their news and information, and their political structure guarantees protection from the law for the elite ie job creators. The Chinese American people are abused, lied to, and fed desperate nationalism in order to distract from their difficulties. And then at the end of the day they can't even control how many children they have (Birth control for all would be far less expensive).

Your username is quite appropriate, hypocrisy.

Fat chance of that. America's fertility rate isn't far over replacement. Not happening, ever.

That sounds a bit unconstitutional to me..

That will never happen here. What SHOULD happen is the government cutting benefits after your first illegitimate child. If these welfare folks knew there would be no government funding of their offspring, they would think twice about having sex without protection.

I know a young woman who is living with the baby daddy of the 2nd child but won't marry him because her benefits will be taken away.

As for China, if they keep up their one child policy and most people want males, eventually population control will not be a concern. Did you know that women in China can be forced to have an abortion up until their due dates? How many of you think that is okay?

And cats

The fact that their gender ratio is so skewed when it's only sporadically enforced is ghastly. I can only imagine how bad it would be if it were truly nation-wide.

hey, they eat what they skin.

Bob...Eating something does not ok the animal suffering excruciating pain before they die. Are you sadistic?People take, take, take...No need for Armageddon.We are slowly killing ourselves off and all of nature will be much better off for it.

jesus won't let us run out of anything. Wait till the big tanker rolls in from the sky

There's plenty of resources to go around.

For how long? 100 years? 200 years? A thousand years? Resources are finite and there doesn't seem to be much thought about future generations. If there are plenty of resources, why is a good portion of the world's population (1/8th ?) starving right now?

There's plenty of water on earth; look at the oceans.

You do realize that is salt water and you can't drink it, right? I thought desalination plants were the answer at one time, but it requires a lot of energy to remove salt from water. A lot of the problems we have can be attributed to overpopulation. Perhaps you are just being sarcastic.

Plenty of water in the oceans that are becoming more and more polluted. That's right; go drink the salt water...Great population control.

Funny how you call our government a "Republican monarchy" when the Democrats control the senate and the White House. I suppose anything less than a complete Democratic majority across the board just makes them completely helpless in the face of those terrible Republicans? Are they really that weak?

More to the point, do you seriously believe that "population control" is a partisian issue? Laughable. Show me a Democrat who advocates for a one child policy and I'll show you an unemployed politician.

Yep. Why do people think they have the right to create more people? What about the rights of the people they are creating? What about quality of life vs. quantity? The fact of the matter is that the current system isn't working. In the age of information, ignorance is a choice. We can all clearly see the planet and its resources deteriorating, economies crumbling and the fact that the vast, vast majority of people live in poverty and squalor. Who are we to continue bringing people into this world that clearly cannot support the path our species has chosen? We have reached a point where we need to be thinking about future sustainability. We are not going to go extinct as a species if we cut down on reproduction for a generation or two. We need to worry about the damage we are doing to this planet by reproducing with impunity and no plan for the future - what kind of world are the hypothetical children going to inherit? Are we not intelligent enough to realize that reproduction is a RESPONSIBILITY, not a right??

Interesting thread. I cannot imagine Americans allowing the government to have any say over their reproductive rights - you would have a major civil war on your hands. That said, today we actually offer tax incentives to have children, and provide additional welfare funds for additional children. It would be interesting to see how people would respond if there were taxes placed on having children. But then- how do you possibly implement that? You already have so many children that people cannot afford...if you make it even harder, that's a disaster....but potentially to start that going forward? It's a very challenging topic. I think Obama took the right first step in providing free birth control though.

Realistically, though, the US government has more authority over a uterus than a gun already. Abortion and birth control are often hard to come by, while anyone who pays to get into a gun show can buy an assault rifle. The fact of the matter is that better educated people (generally) make better decisions regarding reproduction - i.e., they wait until they are financially stable to reproduce, have fewer children, etc. - perhaps the root of the overpopulation problem is really education. People need to be educated and given the tools they need to control their reproduction themselves. But we are not there yet. Something needs to be done in 3rd world countries with exploding populations of starving, diseased children with no hope for the future. It is CRUEL to allow these kids to be born into the world. Far more cruel than telling the people who are already here to curb their procreation habits. IMO.

I think those of you that encourage 1 child birth control should check out now...and leave room for those new babies. You obviously have not studied the negative populations of France and other countries...soon to be the USA too. There are MANY of us that have no children...and our siblings are having them for us. But you don't take that into account... God values children as blessings...and we should too.

Not to mention the fact that all of our medical advancements have allowed genetic problems to become epidemic. Babies that never would have survived to reproductive years 100 or even 25 years ago are being fixed up and medicated and reproducing, passing their crappy genetic material on to the next generation creating the NEED for meds and surgeries. We are totally destroying ourselves as a species, as well as destroying our planet.

Sadly, that is true.... But how could you possibly not provide preventative care when you know it exists? Or provide organ transplants to someone in need? It sounds like a great plan, until it's your family, your child. I would do anything medically possible to save someone in my family, and you cannot expect people to stand by and watch when medical treatments exist. However - I do think people should abort when they know their baby will have severe defects-- tough call, but to me it's more about the quality of life of the child....

Oh, I agree - I have spent a lot of my professional career arguing about the ethics of stem cell research and other medical advances as they pertain to curbing the problems humanity has caused with its medical ambition and good intentions. It is a terrible quandary. On one end of the spectrum you have eugenics and the weeding out of bad genes for the good of all, which sounds ideal, until you are face to face with the individual who may be considered of sub par genetic material. The fact of the matter is that we got ahead of ourselves as a species in a lot of areas, reproduction and medicine being only two. We are at a point where we need to, as a society, take a step back and make some tough decisions about how we plan on carrying on. We are intelligent enough to see the path we are on and what we are doing to ourselves and our descendents, but we may be too emotional to do anything about it...I would do anything to save anyone in my family, too. So would everyone else. And that's the problem. We've saved so many that in the not so distant future there may be more that need saving than here to save them, and then we're done...

And exactly where is the prospect of global famine coming from? Most developing countries are still losing a quarter to a third of their harvests due to poor technology and infrastructure, to say nothing of their water supplies.

Draconian population control is a disgusting tactic for dealing with resource management. If you're concerned about it, then we should probably concentrate on, you know, managing resources.

SF, what do you think about yearly bear hunts and deer population control?

Thank God that the religious community as you say do value life so much. I strongly believe that there would be no "problem" if those who believe there is a "problem" just got rid of themselves. If you don't value life as the rest of us do, why be here. You are entitled to your opinion and so is everyone else. I believe life is just as important for my children, as it is for anyone else. You should go thank your momma for valuing your life too.

Shut up.

TFNJ

SF, what do you think about yearly bear hunts and deer population control?

If you asked me, I would advocate shooting them with a needle full of birth control hormones. Ever hear of Trap, neuter, release? Works very well to control stray cat populations and cut down on the spread of communicable disease. But all that would ruin the fun that hunters have killing in the name of population control.

My point to SF wasn't whether he liked hunting or not, Jerseyshore. It was, since he is so feverishly against China's idea, to see if its because he cares so much about life and whether its right for anyone to dictate how often a life form procreates. I want to expose the hypocrisy. Its ok for us to say that certain animals are over populated and kill them. but the same doesn't apply to humans.

License to breed

This is a scary thought.....in many ways, it's brilliant - a license to breed. But in others, it's terrifying. If the government had that kind of control, imagine the "genocide" that could be put in place and the race wars etc - that would inevitably ensue.

Go to China and you will understand their population problem. Theyare doing the right thing way ahead of the rest of the world. The whole damn world is over populated and it's causing very severe problems

Forced abortions are a tragedy because birth control should be available to EVERYONE that wants it, but starving, sick children are sickening.