Lol, how so? If marriage equality wasn't achieved it wasn't suddenly going to make Johno stop loving blokes and go get a bunch of ladies knocked up?
That gay marriage thing........
- Thread starter Dozer
- Start date
Oddjob
Merry fucking Xmas to you assholes
I think comparing the PRC and Nazi Germany gives you the answer.
Trying to eradicate the jews/bolsheviks failed, killed ~30 million on the ostfront and led directly to the creation of Isreal and all the attached craziness since.
The PRC have peacefully avoided ~400 million births. This in turn brought forward their demographic dividend by decades and reduced the size of their post war baby boom and the attached problems.
I don't agree with a lot the PRC does but they got this one right.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
I think that's a false equation - no control = too many people and structural collapse. Less people = structural sustainability.
What about - Technological advancement = sustainable practices and ability to sustain curent growth trends?
You reckon? What about the fact that they now have an aging population that they are struggling to turn around and that they are likely to get old before they get rich?
4 grandparents, two retiring parents supported by one child. Climbing numberr of retirees, lower numbers in workforce. Middle class has been created but now cost of living is precluding many couples from having a second child even though they are now allowed to have them.
The story of the One Child Policy is far from over.
Nautonier
Eats Squid
Pity they decided to scrap the policy recently. Then there's the case of the Japanese, who, with no regulations in place, just don't seem to be breeding enough to sustain their population numbers. With the PRC it was good for their economy, whereas the Japanese are saying it's a disaster. Meanwhile in Australia welfare-dependant ice addicts continue to breed like rabbits...
Was it?
Not according to most economists (including Chinese) when they consider current future trends.
Oddjob
Merry fucking Xmas to you assholes
Without the one child policy they would have simply had a larger demographic hump later. Yes they may have been richer but maybe not.
Thats assuming that the Chinese environment would have stood up to an extra 400million aspiring middle class consumers.
Japan also shows that being rich does not solve the social problems.
From a macro-economic perpective there's a lot to like about the one child policy. Want cheaper housing? Have less people. Lower unemployment and higher pay? Have less people. Less inequality? Have less people. Less war, lower crime, better health care etc etc etc.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
Nautonier
Eats Squid
It's an interesting concept. In a lot of ways it seems like an obvious answer to all of the downsides to overpopulation, but then there's the subsidiary effects that Johnny mentioned (and what's happening in Japan) where there are not enough young people to support too many old people. Perhaps if it were left to play out over a longer timeframe, things would equalise out to a point where it was ultimately better. 35 years is only enough time to see some short term benefits and mid term problems.
I disagree, the worlds economic model is based on growth. The opposite of of what you suggest is more likely without it.
Hans Rosling has some interesting videos about population growth if anyone's interested.
Wow, never thought I would ever hear support for the One Child policy. Strange times.
Calvin27
Eats Squid
The problem isn't Japan's ageing population and low birth rate, the problem is that they are the only country where everyone else is growing. Context is important. Surprisingly Japanese attitudes towards gays are pretty conservative.
ozzybmx
taking a shit with my boobs out
I know some very religious people (Christians) who would do anything for anybody, but were dead against this.
The others... homophobic and the likes, yes bigotry at its finest.
They should just have introduced it instead of dividing the country and causing people to have a say either way.
andrew9
Likes Dirt
They're nice friendly bigots then?
Calvin27
Eats Squid
I've always felt it is bit ironic calling someone a bigot. You are intolerant to their intolerance? :behindsofa:
moorey
call me Mia
The biological urge to procreate is primal, not logical.
moorey
call me Mia
Can you say False Equivalency?
Most Christians want their religious freedoms protected...the freedom to discriminate.
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
You mean how we can make so much money from fertility treatment...when there is profit to be made, the opportunistic will line up in an orderly fashion.
I fucking knew it! This legalisation of gay marriage is going to turn straight people gay.
On population growth, it was only a short.time ago that our own government was in a panic about it. Peter Costello had a saying 1 for mum, 1 for dad, and 1 for the country. He was so serious about it that they gave out money! But their support for maternity leave was pretty weak.
Calvin27
Eats Squid
Yeah that always puts a strange look of their faces as well
rowdyflat
chez le médecin
Got to catch up wrt shmity. ''Anyway gay marriage is good for population control.''
I know it sounds silly but most of my gay patients male and female [GP] were heterosexually married w children prior to about 20 years ago when it became acceptable to be gay.
Prior to this the only way to survive was to marry and hope that you were attracted to the opposite sex and that your gayness would go away.
Yackandandah is very gay tolerant now except for fundamentalist Christians who have been known to harass them.
I know it sounds silly but most of my gay patients male and female [GP] were heterosexually married w children prior to about 20 years ago when it became acceptable to be gay.
Prior to this the only way to survive was to marry and hope that you were attracted to the opposite sex and that your gayness would go away.
Yackandandah is very gay tolerant now except for fundamentalist Christians who have been known to harass them.
I know people like that too, very nice yet wish to force their values on everyone around them on some particular issues. I know non-religious who are the same. On some issues they just can't live and let live. And that's why I get uncomfortable with having to respect the no vote - I'm being asked to respect people who don't want to respect my right to choose.
Certainly agree with your last line, Turnbull didn't have the bottle to lead on this (or numerous other issues....).