Chirac warns of 'African flood'

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:41:01 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim Ley writes:

forced sterilisation, or forced abortions, or what??? is not a way to
eliminate suffering If you're not suggesting such things to "limit
population growth", exactly what are you suggesting?

I think parents should be licensed.

how does the licensing scheme work?

Jim.

Ken Tough writes:

Yes, US aid funds mandate a specific proportion be tied to abstinence-
only and pro-life programs, and withhold funding related to abortion
and limit condom-related programs.

That's bizarre, but nothing surprises me about the US these days.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jim Ley writes:

So it's not true at all, there's quite a few rich countries in the
world who've not controlled their population through war, and haven't
all died out through famine or pestilence.

They were lucky.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jim Ley writes:

how does the licensing scheme work?

They take an exam. If they pass, they can have children. If they
don't, they can't. Just like becoming a pilot.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:17:27 GMT, (Jim Ley) wrote:

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 20:02:21 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim Ley writes:

Let's
be clear controlling family size is not a sensible solution for
African poverty.

Why not?

Because it it's not the cause of poverty, it's a by product of the
poverty which leads to high mortality rates. You need to fight the
causes.

Those being Africans?
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Dave Frightens Me writes:

Those being Africans?

In Africa, that is largely true.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 12:22:43 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim Ley writes:

So it's not true at all, there's quite a few rich countries in the
world who've not controlled their population through war, and haven't
all died out through famine or pestilence.

They were lucky.

you previously stated that there was no luck in it, it was a law or
nature...

Jim.

Jim Ley writes:

you previously stated that there was no luck in it, it was a law or
nature...

I made no such statement. They were lucky that resources were
adequate to prevent famine and pestilence. But nobody is lucky
forever, especially with a constantly increasing population.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:14:25 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim Ley writes:

Because it it's not the cause of poverty, it's a by product of the
poverty which leads to high mortality rates. You need to fight the
causes.

I don't understand. High mortality rates were not under discussion.
The discussion concerned controlling birth rates. And population
explosions very definitely lead to poverty.

You just can't sell fertility control to a population whose children
die off at an alarming rate. In a society with no old-age or
disability pensions, you need to be sure enough of your children
survive to adulthood to support you in your old age.

Also, in a subsistence society, a child begins to be a productive
member of the household at about age 6, so five years of investment in
feeding him yields over 10 years of productive work before he goes off
to support his own family. When children begin to need shoes and
doctor's visits, and especially when they begin to attend school, they
instead become an expense. You need to support them maybe for 12
years, at a much higher level of life, in order to get maybe 6 years
of productive work from them.

As populations rise above the subsistence level, which is usually in
tandem with decreasing mortality, they tend to look for ways of
controlling fertility on their own. It happened in Europe beginning in
the 18th century, without any developments in new methods of fertility
control. This process has now begun in Africa.
--
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:38:34 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

writes:

Or providing people with condoms, birth control pills, etc. But the US
won't provide aid to countries that use birth control, right?

I don't know. Won't it?

They won't support family planning programs that include abortion.

--
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup