I have always been thinking that 1-child policy can automatically solve EACH AND EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM OF HUMANKIND: energy supply and demand, energy poverty, petro-politics, climate change, and biodiversity loss. That’s in theory. However, as I have been looking at China to see how its effect would turn out to be, I have grown increasingly confused due to its (Chinese) uber-development based on dirty energy and inefficient buildings in the past and next decades. Regardless, 1-child policy is utterly necessary and we have to come up what can play along with it to shackle all the aforementioned problems.
All the Yes points:
All the No points:
- Where will this then end…
- The punishment for failing to follow the rules would infringe on women’s right to control their own bodies.
- The dangers of an aging population
- Increase in forced abortions, female infanticide, and gender imbalance
- Social problems are created by a population of only children
- Just do the math
Exponential population growth rate and civilisation collapse
Admittedly I’m not sure how you would enforce such a system, it does have its advantages.
With the exponential growth in the human population over the last 50 years or so, we have seen an increase in poverty levels and a greater strain on the earths resources. If we continue this trend of population growth, there will be a point when we reach and exceed the earths capacity (in terms of resource and space). Once this happens we will be on a global path to civilisation collapse as we fight over the remaining resources (Iraq) and as our levels of food can’t feed ourselves.
With the one child policy, we can make sure that we get the earth’s population under control (to a degree). But like I said, I’m not sure how you could enforce this without infringing basic human rights.
Firstly, it is crucial to acknowledge that population growth rates are not uniform throughout the world. While many Asian and African nations (China and India being the two famous examples) have seen enormous population growth which does indeed threaten the sustainability of many communties and pose immense challenges to resources, other parts of the world see very low and. in some cases, declining population rates. This can be due to a variety of reasons, but in more economically developed countries such as Japan and Italy, it tends to be as a result of low levels of immigration (or high emigration) and sharply declining birth rates. Perhaps one way of reducing pressure on resources would be to slacken immigration restrictions and provide incentives for people in overpopulated areas to move to nations and regions which are relatively underpopulated.
Secondly, human beings have a remarkable ability to adapt to seemingly inhospitable conditions. A survival instinct which goes above and beyond the realm of the animal kingdom has long ensured that when faced with adversity, humans have managed to get by. Clearly the challenges which overpopulation poses cannot be simply ignored or left to address themselves on their own, but we should not underestimate the solutions which could come out of a crisis. A strain on capacity, in terms of both space and resources could well provide the incentive for innovative new uses of existing space and resources.
Where will this then end…
It will start with a one child policy…and then does that mean you have to be steralised once you’ve had one child? What if the child passes away, then you have no chance of having another…so that means no steralisation…but what if birth control fails and you accidently fall pregnant again…does that mean you have to abort the child?? Which is against the core beliefs of many cultures and religions.
The one child policy might work in theory but in practice it’s much too dictatorship like; the only reason it works so well in China is because of the fact that China is able to control the movement and the actions of its inhabitants…In Western society however there would be a huge uproar as the one-child policy over here would mean an end to freedom of choice etc. Its just not going to happen.
Having a one child policy does not have to mean that there will be authoritarian responses to those who have more than one child. It is much more sensible for governments declare itself to have a one child policy and to enforse it through the tax system. Large tax breaks and benefits for having one child which is all taken away when you have a second. Even in a reletively authoritarian china the one child policy is not absolute.
This would mean that a one child policy is not an end to freedom of choice, simply as in so many things the government tries to guide your choice through incentives and disincentives. Very few people object to the government raising high taxes on smoking in order to discourage smoking, it would be similar in the case of discouraging having more than one child.
The punishment for failing to follow the rules would infringe on women’s right to control their own bodies.
Unplanned pregnancies happen. They happen with IUD’s and with birth control pills. Many women, including pro-choice women, strongly believe that abortion would be committing a murder. Forcing abortion on such women would be a violation of their body and their values.
Further, if you tax families that have more than one child, you’re essentially punishing the child for the sins of the parent. (i.e. you’re lowering their standard of living as punishment for being born.) That hardly seems fair.
Allow society to have unlimited access to reliable birth control. Encourage women to go to college and have careers. We’ve already seen negative population growth in countries that follow that type of policy. Japan can’t get her people to reproduce enough to sustain their economy. The same holds true for many European countries.
There’s no need to violate people’s right to their very body in order to control human population. Social factors already serve as a regulating force.
This seems to be arguing that we have the right to do whatever we want with our own bodies and the government should get out of the way, even to the point of not using a tax and benefits system. Yes people should have the right to have more children if they want but the government should be able to discourage it as much as it can because of the consequences of having more children for everyone else who is on the planet. Smoking was banned in public areas mostly because of passive smoking affecting others. Having more children certainly affects others by helping to use up the earth’s resources.
Moreover if the government is providing benefits for one child why should it not have the right to take away those benefits when you have more than one child?
Saying that we punnish the child for the sins of the parent seems to be ignoring that the parent had already decided to do that. Their income is unlikely to go up at the point where they have a second child so they have decided to spread their income over more people already. Why should the parents have this choice and the government not?
The dangers of an aging population
One of the long-term consequences of any sudden and enforced reduction in birth rates will be the creation of an enormous group of dependent and elderly citizens who will pose a burden to younger generations. As China is currently experiencing, a relatively small population of post-policy ‘only children’ will form the economically active group whose task is to maintain the much larger group of elderly pre-policy multiple children. As China continues to grow economically while its life expectancy rises, the pressure placed on the only children will increase and young people may find themselves supporting many more of their aged parents and grandparents. So long as population is cut in such a dramatic way, any nation which implements the policy needs to be fully prepared for the demographic and economic consequences.
Aging will be no problem. When average age will be 200 years and 150 years old man will be as young as a 30 years old person. The real challenge is the TFR total fertility rate. In Niger, Male, Columbia, Somalia, Sudan, Ethipia, Rwanda, Nigeria, Tribal areas and KPK province of Pakistan & Afghanistan etc., the TFR is the highest in the world. The result, high rate of death, most tragic deaths due to poverty, hunger, diseases & conflicts.
In Afghanistan 14000 to 15000 development projects like Roads, Bridges, Power Houses, Schools, Colleges, Universities, Parliament House, Provincial Assemblies, Supreme Court, High Courts, Local Courts, Police Headquarter, Police Stations, Military Headquarters, Airports, Telephone Exchanges, Hospitals, Medical Colleges, Engineering Colleges, Secretariat Buildings, Parks, Playgrounds, Gardens, Industrial Areas, Agricultural Research Centres are being built by almost 50 countries from Germany to Japan and Korea to France. These countries have cut the budgets of their own people and at the cost of their nation’s hard earned money have been spending billions and billions of dollars. This huge money which belongs to the children of Japan, Korea, Australia, Germany, France, UK, USA, Netherland, Holland, Turkey, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Belgium etc., is being spent on the beastliest Afghanis to make them humans but the most ungrateful and thankless ferocious beastliest Afghanis are attacking and fighting with the whole civilised developed world. Pakistan instead of contributing with 1000 or so development projects as a neighbor itself creating hurdles and demanding money for itself & harboring the attackers. Why Afghanis and Pakistanis have become so mean. Because they are too much population in numbers and they have too short resources. These people are so hungry have lost their mind, sense of value and proportion.
The only solution is that 1 child policy is strictly enforced in Afghanistan, FATA, KPK , other parts of Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Burma, Niger, Male, Colombia, Rawanda, Sudan, Somalia, Uganda and all the 3rd world countries. There will be complete peace elsewhere.
START WITH AFGHANISTAN, ENGAGE CHINA, CHINA SHARES ITS BORDER WITH AFGHANISTAN IT IS GEOGRAPHICALLY EASY. 50 COUNTRIES SHOULD NOT WASTE THEIR EFFORT AND RESOURCES. THEY SHOULD CALL CHINESE MILITARY AND DOCTORS AND DO VASECTOMY OF EVERY AFGHAN WHO HAS 1 CHILD OR MORE AND THERE WILL BE COMPLETE PEACE IN AFGHANISTAN FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND. THE HATCHERY OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMES AND CRIMINALS IN AFGHANISTAN WILL VANISH AN AFGHANISTAN WILL BECOME A FIRST WORLD COUNTRY WITHIN 30 YEARS LIKE CHINA. SO THE ONLY SOLUTION IS 1 CHILD POLICY IN AFGHANISTAN WITHOUT LOSS OF A SINGLE DAY.
Increase in forced abortions, female infanticide, and gender imbalance
China as a test case for the one child policy has shown high levels of forced abortions and female infanticide. China as in many countries around the world place higher value on boys in society (possibly due to rural families need for a son to assist in farmwork). This has led to high levels of female infanticide due to families preference to have a boy as their one child. It is common in China for new born baby girls to be left abandoned in the street. This is believed to attribute to China’s extreme population gender imbalance. This is not to say this would occur globally but would certainly affect gender balance. This ofcourse leading to problems in later life when males seek wives. The lack of women in China is thought to be the cause of many kidnappings of women from countries bordering China.
All these three 1) forced abortion, 2) female infanticide, 3) gender imbalance should be made cognizable offences. Only and only vasectomy of all males who have 1 child or more should be made law. It should be enforced strictly. There will be no problem. All the problems will be resolved. World will become one and peaceful. No passport no visa no border no war no conflict an ideally peaceful, prosperous and happy world will be the absolute result which all of mankind will get. Thank you for making such a nice website.
Social problems are created by a population of only children
The phenomena in China of overlindulged children has been referred to by the media as ‘Little Emperor syndrome’. Social problems such as poor communication skills and sharing abilities (co-operation with others) in later life could span from being an only child.
Children have a right to be treated as Emperors. Not like Afghan and Pashtun children who are produced in dozens, then sold in market to Taliban and Nato by the same father getting money from both sides and purchasing another girl of 15 years to produce more soldiers. One Afghan or Pashtun have even 30 children or so. Against 200 dollars you can buy a suicide bomber who to serve his family is ready to give his life but his father has no shame. They sell their boys and girls too. This is the main crop they produce in too much quantity. After 30 years of 1 child policy 2 can be allowed. The too many produced children live without food, water, clothing, homes, medicines. It is the most heinous crime against humanity to produce many children irresponsibly and to be an irresponsible parent.
Just do the math
Just to bring in another way to look at this, I will provide an example. Let us assume that there is a country with 1000 people total, with 300 of them divided equally between single females and single males within the age of childbearing but not having any children, this is 150 females and 150 males. If these 300 individuals were to become couples at the same instant and would become immediately fertile, contributing one child to the country´s population each couple, everything else remains the same, after nine months the country would have increased to a population of 1150. Straight forward. Let us further assume that births were equally divided between girls and boys, so that in the future these contemporary individuals will come to the age were their parents were at the time this example began. Seventy five women and men within childbearing age would contribute 75 new individuals to the total population of the country bringing the new total to 1225 under a similar scenario. The relative rate of growth in the country´s population from the first event to the second would show a sharp decline, but nevertheless the population went up. Over the time that went by, no one died, (after all it is just an example of my view). If we continue with the example replicating the same scenario over time with a continuing decline in birth rates and no one dying, it will reach a point where there will be no more new additions to the population because the childbearing possibilities have been exhausted with ever decreasing childbearing couples as the scenarios take place in time. My point is that in order to have a sustainable society, it must be capable to attain the capability to have a replacement rate that makes it viable and avoids it extinction. Of course there are instances where this is not happening but, in a recent trip a made to Europe, it was obvious that in the near future Europe will be facing a diluted version of what I described in my example. Many European countries have birth rates that have fallen below what makes their societies viable and are faced with the dilemma of having to support an ever increasing elderly population with fewer individuals as a result of not having had enough children. What follows I took from Wikipedia. With 82 million inhabitants in January 2010, Germany is the most populous country in the European Union. However, its fertility rate of 1.42 children per mother is one of the lowest in the world, and the federal statistics office estimates the population will shrink to between 65 and 70 million by 2060. Italy will need to raise its retirement age to 77 or admit 2.2 million immigrants annually to maintain its worker to retiree ratio. About 25% of Italian women do not have children while another 25% only have one child. The region of Liguria in northwestern Italy now has the highest ratio of elderly to youth in the world. Ten percent of Liguria’s schools closed in the first decade of the 21st century. The city of Genoa, one of Italy’s largest and the capital of Liguria, is declining faster than most European cities with a death rate of 13.7 deaths per 1,000 people, almost twice the birth rate, 7.7 births per 1,000 people, as of 2005.
Every where there is bloody conflict, tragedy of wars, killings, hunger, poverty, homelessness, diseases, shantytowns, infighting, miseries,the reason behind is nothing else but population explosion. Too many children. Too many children fight with each other, kill each other and kill others too. 1 child policy is the only solution. For a specific period of 30 years in the whole 3rd world and there will be no more third world. The whole world will become first world. I agree rather believe that only and only 1 child policy can reduce the misery to the minimum level. Look at Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Niger, Male, Palestine, the basic reason of the conflict, misery and fight is too many children per woman. The mothers of these areas lure and recite rhymes to their infant babies to kill and be killed when their children would grow. Is this the future of mankind. Most of the Afghan, Pathan, Sudanese, Rwandan, Somalian, Palestinian women bear 10 to 15 children even more in many cases. These children fight all the time with each other. They kill each other. They kill others too. They are killed by others too. They live a life of misery. If 1 child policy is adopted in Palestine and Israel too, the Israelis and Palestinians will start loving each others children like their own and the conflict will vanish away. The same will happen in every conflicting area.
If uncontrolled birth is allowed, the offspring of one parent will make nuclear bombs to kill their own brothers and sisters.
SAVE HUMANITY, SAVE MANKIND, ADOPT 1 CHILD POLICY AND MAKE THE WHOLE WORLD PEACEFUL.
Look at Japan or Eastern Europe, those countries have birth rates so low that their economies are stagnant.
It’s not about the total population but about the working population. Japan will soon have 40% of its entire population as retired elderly people.
So who will take care of the retired people? (maybe you are against immigration too so obviously not them).
Also for robot technology to advance to that of: I, robot…I think we need to wait until 22 century.
We would love to hear what you think – please leave a comment!
Yes. Urgently start 1 child policy for at least 30 years. There is no other way. If you do not do it now then be ready to face world war-III the final round. With the passage of time technology ll become common. Fundamentalists & violent extremists will be able to develop WMD very soon & new arguments will come forward like “Border restrictions by first world are illegal” “Border restrictions are against the will of God” “All wealth which the first world possess is the looted money during colonization” so destroying west & first world will be favorite & popular ideology in the 3rd world. Many exoduses like Rohingya from Myanmar Burma will take place. No country will accept them. Many smaller sub nationalities may lose their citizenship in many countries like Rohingaya lost in Burma in 1982. These stateless people would turn to be the most dangerous terrorists around the world & justifiably be destroying the world when the world community is miserably failing to solve their problems. Many Many Rwandas, Ethiopias, DRCs, Somalias, Afghanistans, Iraqs, Nigerias, Sudans are in line of unending bloody conflicts. Before the figure touches 9 billion, final round is apprehended to start to finish every thing. MANKIND IS ALREADY TOO LATE to respond to this menace. First world has controlled their birth rate for more than 70 years but 3rd world has multiplied by more than 3000% since 1900. Make an emergent, immediate & urgent appeal to the Chinese Leadership to export, enforce, implement 1 child policy in the 3rd world and contribute in saving the mankind.