I would say that it's a needed course of action in some countries, and not in others. What ecanned pointed out about developed countries is true; Japan is a very good example of a dangerously plummeting population.

On the other hand you could look at "population control" as a measure that goes both ways. In Japan's case, they would need to begin government sponsored programs to support further growth, such as tax breaks or guaranteed paid time off for family time. That paid time off would need to extend to the family as a whole and would not be specifically restricted to pregnant women. Part of Japan's problem is that they work like robots and rarely come home for longer than just enough time to sleep. Sometimes they don't even do that.

Closer to home here in the U.S. we have such a huge surge of families from Mexico that it's become a strong political issue. Families in poorer countries have more children because it is not expected that all of their children will survive, and ultimately someone has to be around to continue the family. Unfortunately many of them are crossing the boarder illegally and are consequently putting a strain on resources.

Of course, I can't for a moment blame people for seeking a better life for their family.

Both cases - raising or decreasing population - should be approached with public education. Seminars, TV, radio, and your typical advertisement posters are all good sources to disseminate factual data. The more educated the populace is about a situation the more likely they will be to take control themselves. This allows the most significant part of the moral issue to be side stepped.

The downside to this is that this process will be slower and will probably require an effort spanning a few generations. The fruits of this labor wouldn't be seen for a good bit of time.

This may also seem costly, but in truth the cost is probably small compared to the cost of uncontrolled growth or an evaporating population.

There will also always be people who think that it's their "God given right (or duty) to have 8 kids", or however many. For this, you would need something like etphonehome's idea of stopping subsidies after X amount of children (if your attempt is to reduce population). You could even tax such families a certain amount of additional percentage points per child over the target family size.

It's an issue that's easy to go back-and-forth on quite a bit, but ultimately our species does need to do something about its out-of-control breeding. We are like any other animal; we have our habitat and that habitat has its resources, and that's it.

Permalink | Report