February 6, 2004
TOO STUPID TO EDIT A PAPER (via Brian MN):
Oh, brother, oh, sister (Seattle Times, 2/03/04)
State Rep. Maralyn Chase, an Edmonds Democrat, has introduced a bill encouraging Washington couples to have only two or fewer children. Chase got the idea from Yakima activist Ed Patton, who has been promoting limited population growth for years.Patton and Chase correctly argue people need to talk about population growth and density — and the impacts on state budgets and natural resources. [...]
Chase doesn't expect this bill to go anywhere; she is merely trying to stir civic conversation. Great, then why bother a busy Legislature with such distractions?
Family planning is a personal decision. Couples make the call based on a variety of private factors. Government need not butt in on the decision.
The birth rate in many countries, in Spain and Italy, for example, has declined to sustainable levels, largely because individual couples decided to have fewer children for economic and quality-of-life reasons, not because of a state-sponsored pamphlet.
Sustainable?
In shrinking Spanish hamlets, immigrants welcome: Newcomers are enticed with jobs, housing, and airfare. But the repopulation efforts have not been without growing pains. (Dale Fuchs, 9/02/03, The Christian Science Monitor)
Italy baby-cash aims to boost births (Tamsin Smith, 10/02/03, BBC)
Sustainable to Greens = humans extinct, Gaia saved
Posted by: JackSheet at February 6, 2004 12:38 PMShouldn't the Yakima activist be worried about not limiting the growth of future generations of casino gamblers?
Posted by: Robert D at February 6, 2004 1:13 PMYakima is the one part of the Upper Left Washington where Spanish is the language many employers use to communicate with their employees.
As for those quaint cottages-- why is so important that someone live in them? Wouldn't it be cheaper to just have a bunch of empty shells and pretend people live there? Let's turn some of those countries into giant theme parks where people are paid to keep the quaint customs alive, and tourons can see how the ancient Europeans lived.
The current plan is for each generation of Europeans to be half the size of the previous, leaving no tourists to vist each other's empty wilderness.
Posted by: Ripper at February 6, 2004 6:47 PMDoesn't declining population growth lead to real economic problems? Population growth of less then 2.1 children per woman is considered "non-sustaining." Italy and Japan have significantly less then this (approx 1.4 for both). They face significant challenges in the years ahead trying to sustain competetive economic growth and maintaining their retirement programs. Most Social Security schemes are a wealth transfer from those working to those who are retired. As the population ages an imbalance is created whereby less and less workers have to support more and more retirees. Without population growth there is little opportunity for economic growth.
Posted by: scarmer at February 7, 2004 1:13 PMDoesn't declining population growth lead to real economic problems? Population growth of less then 2.1 children per woman is considered "non-sustaining." Italy and Japan have significantly less then this (approx 1.4 for both). They face significant challenges in the years ahead trying to sustain competetive economic growth and maintaining their retirement programs. Most Social Security schemes are a wealth transfer from those working to those who are retired. As the population ages an imbalance is created whereby less and less workers have to support more and more retirees. Without population growth there is little opportunity for economic growth.
Posted by: scarmer at February 7, 2004 1:13 PMDoesn't declining population growth lead to real economic problems? Population growth of less then 2.1 children per woman is considered "non-sustaining." Italy and Japan have significantly less then this (approx 1.4 for both). They face significant challenges in the years ahead trying to sustain competetive economic growth and maintaining their retirement programs. Most Social Security schemes are a wealth transfer from those working to those who are retired. As the population ages an imbalance is created whereby less and less workers have to support more and more retirees. Without population growth there is little opportunity for economic growth.
Posted by: scarmer at February 7, 2004 1:14 PMscarmer, I agree with you
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at February 10, 2004 4:12 PM