Stop Having Kids

Want controversy? Start a discussion on whether or not we should be bring babies into this chaotic world. That is what the Stop Having Kids organization is doing.

I don't know too many people that have had planned pregnancies. Most of those with kids report that the pregnancy "just happened". 

That does not seem like the best start for a new human being considering the huge burden unplanned kids put on a family.

The Stop Having Kids organization is asking humanity to think about that, about where kids come from, how they are made, and what it means to bring more into this already crowded world.

Having kids is one of the most resource intensive things two people can do together, as it creates lifelong consumers. 

The new babies born into ConsumerLand will each require tons and tons of resources decade after decade for up to 70 years or more.

What does that do to make the world a better place?

If the powers that be are trying to kill us all, and I think they are, why not prevent them from doing their dirty work by not giving them more humans to murder with their "solutions" to overpopulation and resource depletion?

Stop Having Kids is asking humanity to care for the humans already on our planet before thoughtlessly bringing more into existence.

A lot of people bring new consumers into the world because of societal pressure, or by mistake, rather than it being a rational, well thought out choice.

Speaking from experience, being childfree has many benefits besides reducing the stress on our life support system, and making a good life more possible for those already here.

Here are a few listed at Stop Having Kids website:

• more free time and freedom in general
• the ability to be more spontaneous
• more ability to give back and serve a public good
• more money and less chances of falling into financial hardship and hunger
• more sleep (uninterrupted too) and relaxation
• more privacy, peace, and solitude
• having actual days off and less hecticness
• more ability to care for oneself
• ability to maintain one's goals
• ability to care well for other life forms 
• less stress about planning, shopping, and cooking for others
• more ability to invest in new skills and hobbies
• more ability to travel and move
• more possible to develop existing relationships with people
• more quality time with one’s partner(s)
• less stress in general

A simple life can be even more blissfully simple in a childfree setting.

Think about it. 

If one still wants to have kids after that, they will be better prepared to do so, and the child will be more welcome and well adjusted.

If not, couples will be doing an overpopulated, resource-stressed world a favour.

It may be controversial, but this is a discussion that we should be having at a societal level.

Mother Earth Will Fix Things If We Don't

Earth's human population, given current levels of consumption, is not sustainable. As such, it must be dealt with one way or another.

For example, fatal diseases are Nature’s way of controlling population levels. 

They spread quickly when numbers of individuals in any population increase past the carrying capacity of their environment.

It does not matter if we are talking about fruit flies, lemmings, or humans.

If we don't solve our population/overconsumption problem, Mother Earth will do it for us. 

Her judgement can not be avoided, if we continue to ignore these issues. 

"Why didn't you warn us?", we will wail.

And she will say, 

"First I sent floods. 

Then I sent plagues of locusts. 

Since no one seemed to notice, 

I sent a pandemic.

I suggest you fix your problems.

Or I will."

Population Control - Cash Payment For Childless Women At Menopause?

Over 100 years (between 1950 and 2050), the world’s population will have nearly quadrupled (from 2.5 billion to around 9.5 billion). How do we diffuse this population bomb? Or do we really need to?

When I was growing up there was a thing called the "Population Explosion". These days we don't hear too much about overpopulation, I assume because capitalist bosses want as many babies as can be cranked out. More consumers! 

It is not good for business to discourage the births of yet more victims, so full speed ahead. And don't forget, governments love having more tax slaves.

While some have encouraged voluntary efforts to cut family size, others have proposed more coercive methods, like China's One Child Policy (changed to a 2 child policy in 2016). 

Cutting subsidies for having more children is another proposed way to reduce population growth. Another idea is paying childless women a bonus when they reach menopause. A one time payment of $50,000 dollars has been proposed by some researchers.

Now I see that Hungary is going the other direction - they are paying Hungarian women to have more babies, ostensibly in order to outpace Third World immigration. 

Any Hungarian mom that has 4 or more children will be exempted from paying income tax. For life. 

They can also apply for a $35,000 dollar loan which will be forgiven if the woman has more children. Interest-free loans will also be available for the family to buy a house and car. It seems outrageous, but it is possible that it may not work anyway.

Birth rates are already dropping in many countries. In parts of Europe and Asia, birth rates are below replacement levels. Germany, Japan, Russia, and Taiwan are a few examples of countries not having enough babies to keep the population stable, whether there is a "cash for babies" program or not.

Canada also has a "baby bonus", but it is intended to reduce child poverty, not stimulate birth rates.

So is there a population explosion, or not? Will we level off at around 8 billion, or will we see an increase, in a worst case scenario, all the way up to 26 billion? 

Some say it doesn't really matter, because we don't have a population problem - we have an overconsumption problem.

The more people on Earth, the less each of us has as our fair share of the resources available. That means as population goes up, all of us will need to live more and more simply.

When it comes down to it, neither big business nor governments will solve this issue. The power to do that lies with one group, and one group only - the women of the world. 

Women ultimately decide how many babies are born, because women are not simply "hosts", and they are not birthing pods. Increasingly, they are choosing to have fewer babies.

The rest of us can do our part by consuming less so that each baby born has enough for a good life, regardless of where it comes into the world.

Actually, we might be better off if we offered incentives to consume less. Imagine that happening!

75 Good Years

After age 75, no more tests or treatments.

Most modern "health care" systems go to extreme lengths to extend life. Since a lot of that is private, for profit health care, I hypothesize that the reason for that is because in business one of the golden rules is "Don't kill your customers", or in this case, "Don't let your customers die, ever, if you can make a buck by extending their lives.

Rarely mentioned in the high tech life extension at any cost debate is the issue of quality of life. We might be getting quantity, but what about the quality? Should we really be led kicking and screaming all the way to the grave? Wouldn't it be better to go out on your own terms?

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel agrees, and says that 75 is a good age for him to die. In fact, he believes we would be doing society and loved ones a favour by doing the same.

“A good life is not just about stacking up the years and living as long as possible. People need to focus on quality of life. Setting an actual date for a good time to die helps you focus on what is important in your life. 

What I am trying to do is delineate my views for a good life and make my friends and others think about how they want to live as they grow older. 

We avoid constantly thinking about the purpose of our lives and the mark we will leave. Is making money, chasing the dream, all worth it? 

Indeed, most of us have found a way to live our lives comfortably without acknowledging, much less answering, these big questions on a regular basis. We have gotten into a productive routine that helps us ignore them. 

The deadline also forces each of us to ask whether our consumption is worth our contribution."

The doctor opposes physician-assisted suicide, and instead is a proponent of simply allowing the body to age naturally. He says when he reaches 75 he will refuse all tests and treatments, including the blood pressure medication he takes now.

“I’m not suggesting people kill themselves at 75 but, rather, let nature take its course.”

While some propose extreme life extension, what the world doesn't need right now is a bunch of 300 year olds. We do need to leave something for our children and future generations that will inhabit this crowed planet. Perhaps 75 years of consumption is enough.

It would also simplify things to know when you intend to tell the medical establishment to leave you alone so you can age and die peacefully as nature intended.

I think I would like 75 good years. We will see how I feel if I make it to 74 years of age.

Best Ways To Reduce Consumption Also Most Controversial

Although they are good things, the planet needs more than changing to efficient light bulbs and
lowering the thermostat in the winter.

According to the UN, "today’s consumption is undermining the environmental resource base. It is exacerbating inequalities. And the dynamics of the consumption-poverty-inequality-environment nexus are accelerating." That sounds dire indeed. But wait, there is more.

"If the trends continue without change — not redistributing from high-income to low-income consumers, not shifting from polluting to cleaner goods and production technologies, not shifting priority from consumption for conspicuous display to meeting basic needs — today’s problems of consumption and human development will worsen."

Can individual action alone reverse the trend of increasing consumption? The answer to that question seems to be "no", although we can have great effect by voluntarily adopting simpler ways of living.

The idea of changing our lifestyles to sustainable levels of consumption is considered unthinkable right across the political spectrum. A most inconvenient situation that presently is best met by taking individual action. There are other important areas that need to be addressed as well.

One is the notion of infinite economic growth. As long as that is a societal goal, consumption will continue to increase regardless of how simply some may choose to live.

Another problem that has been lurking quietly in the shadows for decades, is population growth. As long as our population continues to grow, overall consumption will increase.

Over the weekend I visited a site that dealt specifically with consumption growth, notably, exponential growth. It is a concept that is impacting our world right now, and it must be addressed to avert disaster down the road.

Consumption Growth 101 recommends the following as actions that individuals can take that "will have a real impact":

1. Find and support a charity dedicated to preventing unwanted pregnancies throughout the world.

2. If you are young, decide to have one less child than you would otherwise like. Encourage others concerned about consumption to do the same.

"It's that simple," the site says, "and the impact on consumption reduction will literally be immeasurable."

We have been ignoring population growth partly because it is such a controversial topic. It is not the only one.

We will also need a radical restructuring of the global economy in order to operate without the expectation that growth can be infinite in a finite system. It is unlikely to resemble anything currently in existence, although early free market thinkers predicted it would have to happen eventually.

Unfortunately, none of these problems is going to be addressed any time in the near future. It probably won't happen in time to avert major global hardship. Such hardship, if you look around you, has already begun. And it is getting worse.

If all we can do right now is take individual actions to reduce our own consumption, then by all means we should be doing so. Yet another illustration of how any movement worth the change it asks for, has always formed from the bottom up. It is up to those of us at the bottom. We can be the leaders.

We can be the change. Live the change. Share the change. That is the only immediately doable solution to reducing consumption to a sustainable level starting right now. And since that will not be enough, we can work on attaining the other necessary parts as soon as possible.