Does this make you happy or sad?

Evangelion said:
News flash: children take 18 years to grow up. whereas skilled immigrant workers can start work immediately. Governments don't wait to wait around for nearly 20 years in the hope of boosting the workforce.
Click to expand...
Expand your model of encouraging immigration vs a native population that hits its replacement rate alone over time (and I don't mean 10 years, longer).

Which is more sustainable? And don't just think about the country to which people emigrate, think about the country they emigrate from too.

It's a short term unsustainable solution fuelled by greed and laziness (in the nation in which people arrive to) and a lack of willingness to admit that the social safety net in this country isn't sustainable if the number of people required to support it is a multiple of the people dependent on it.

The ideal scenario is a population in which the ratio of dependants (tax consumers) and contributors (tax producers) is equal, and the period of time in which people spend as both categories, i.e. time spent as a child/OAP vs worker, is equal. At the moment people spend far too much time as dependants, due to life expectancy going up and retirement age not going with it. Also kids spend a lot more time in school than they used to.

Short-sighted solution? Fill the contributor section of society with people from abroad (let's ignore the effect this has to the balance of the system from which they leave - although that's an equally serious issue). This will lead to solutions in the short term, the support for the dependants. The problem is those contributors eventually become dependants. You needed more contributors than dependants, but now that larger chunk of contributors are now dependants, so you need even more contributors to support the previous set of contributors. This cycle spirals on and on. And it's partly why the population in this country continues to rocket.

Long term solutions (which are massively politically unpopular and that's why they'll never get implemented). Make state handouts at retirement age worse (encourage people to invest more for retirement, workplace pensions are a good start). Increase state pension age. Don't force kids to stay in school until 18, if you want to leave at 16, go for it. Stop making jobs that didn't used to need a degree, need a degree (nursing, policing, etc). Get the ratio of contributors to dependants around 1:1. Then have a steady population conveyor belt. Giving you a constant population. Also not to mention how much better this would be for the environment.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea how they function on that wage unless they own their home (a possibility since he was 42 when they met). I earn the same and struggle to get by with just one kid (albeit Bath is not a cheap place).
 
Attitudes to contraception were different "back in the day" from both sides of the fence (Male/Female) and the roll of woman has changed significantly in society is well. No longer is it acceptable for them to be lazy and be "stuck at home" all day :)
 
Wizzkidy said:
ILuckily she doesn't want anymore THANK GOD
Click to expand...
lol you DO have a say in it as well mate ;)

I reckon if i was up for it my better half would try for another (we have 1)................... I have said absolutely no chance!. I am all for compromise in a relationship but not when it comes to kids and i categorically do not want any more.
 
randomshenans said:
True though, scarily, isn't it? Stupid people reproduce more.
Click to expand...

Ultimately this doesn't matter that much

The really damaging thing is that smart people (Particularly smart Women) reproduce less, or quite often these days, not at all.

I feel that there is good anecdotal evidence to support the idea that, insofar as there is a genetic link, the genes for "Smarts" are an X chromosome thing. IE you get your smarts from your mother.

The current trend of encouraging smart women to pursue careers rather than have lots of children is represents a genocide of the intellect that society will find it very hard to recover from. This isn't going to be a slow process. It will happen over only 2-3 generations and is already largely underway!

:(
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
JUST LOL IF YOUR SCHOOLING RESULTED IN A FUNDAMENTAL MISUNDERSTANDING OF BIOLOGY AND SPECIFICALLY WOMEN'S BODIES AND EVEN NOW, AS A PRESUMED ADULT, YOU RUN OUT THE 'LOL WIZARDS SLEEVE LOL' LINE.

NOOBS.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows that each baby born is progressively larger than the last one. ARE YOU DENYING THE LAWS OF PHYSICS??!!
 
Haze said:
I know a 24 old woman, just having her 6th kid, I dunno how people do it, or afford it
Click to expand...

You must have zero time to yourself. Even people at work with 2 kids seem to only talk about kids.

Sounds like torture

World population needs to go down. 10 kids is excessive in todays Western world
 
Orionaut said:
The really damaging thing is that smart people (Particularly smart Women) reproduce less, or quite often these days, not at all.

I feel that there is good anecdotal evidence to support the idea that, insofar as there is a genetic link, the genes for "Smarts" are an X chromosome thing. IE you get your smarts from your mother.
Click to expand...

While they may be a link, smart people have dumb children and dumb people have smart children too, so it's not exactly clear cut.

What is clear cut is education, good education creates smarter people... but not one type of 'good' education fits all types of children.

What I find interesting alongside this is Co2 makes people dumber, so if you live in a co2 polluted city, home or work place your IQ drops. I wonder if global co2 rises will affect this or not?
 
Threepwood said:
While they may be a link, smart people have dumb children and dumb people have smart children too, so it's not exactly clear cut.
Click to expand...

What I have noticed over the years is that smart Men who marry not-so-smart Women tend to have reasonably smart daughters but dumb as a box of frogs sons.

Which is why I suspect an X chromosome link.

Threepwood said:
What is clear cut is education, good education creates smarter people... but not one type of 'good' education fits all types of children.
Click to expand...

Education is certainly an important factor in realising whatever potential is already there. (In much the same way as well fed people tend to grow taller than chronically starved ones) But any idea that genetics doesn't play a major factor in objective intelligence flies completely in the face of everything that we (Think) we know about evolution in general and Human evolution in particular.

Threepwood said:
What I find interesting alongside this is Co2 makes people dumber, so if you live in a co2 polluted city, home or work place your IQ drops. I wonder if global co2 rises will affect this or not?
Click to expand...

Or just that dumb people are more likely to live in cities. :p

I can certainly see that while well off smart people might well chose to live in the nicer parts of cities. However, Smart people who cant afford to do so will generally prefer to live in the suburbs/countryside. "Most" inner city populations these days are quite possibly largely composed of less smart than average populations, Perhaps;)

In any case, IQ isn't actually a good way of measuring objective intelligence as such, It is more a way of testing whether the individual concerned possesses the skill sets necessary to survive and prosper in a western style society. Some of these skills will be genetic but a large part of IQ testing does test things that can be learned.
 
Orionaut said:
Ultimately this doesn't matter that much

The really damaging thing is that smart people (Particularly smart Women) reproduce less, or quite often these days, not at all.

I feel that there is good anecdotal evidence to support the idea that, insofar as there is a genetic link, the genes for "Smarts" are an X chromosome thing. IE you get your smarts from your mother.

The current trend of encouraging smart women to pursue careers rather than have lots of children is represents a genocide of the intellect that society will find it very hard to recover from. This isn't going to be a slow process. It will happen over only 2-3 generations and is already largely underway!

:(
Click to expand...
Agree with this tbh
 
Orionaut said:
But any idea that genetics doesn't play a major factor in objective intelligence flies completely in the face of everything that we (Think) we know about evolution in general and Human evolution in particular.
Click to expand...
I agree it can play a part, but I do not think it is as cut and dry as that because intelligent people have stupid children too, as well as stupid parents having intelligent children.

'They' say that genes are only half the story when it comes to intelligence, the other half being enviromental.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom