CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:20
Arguments:24
Total Votes:20
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Solutions to The World's Population Growth (19)

Debate Creator

Idiotobx914(1341) pic



Solutions to The World's Population Growth

 

What can be done to curb the human population growth in order to prevent the world's population from exceeding the carrying capacity of the planet?”

Add New Argument
2 points

Take a page out of Dan Brown's, Inferno and sterilize half the population without consent or vote. If there was a vote, everyone would not for their ideals, not the thing that could save them.

If the world's population is deemed a problem, then the obvious solution would be to reduce the world's population. Now, since rush hour traffic is such a bitch, I would say that the world's population is a problem. Hell..., if you have ever looked at people as obstacles, then you know what I'm talking about. Let's say you are ready to check out at the super market. You see a short line. You make a beeline for it and someone beats you to it. Well..., as far as I'm concerned, that's a world population problem ;)

joecavalry(37423) Clarified
1 point

Hitler would have gotten a lot further if had decided to take out the stupid people instead. ;)

SitaraMusica(536) Clarified
2 points

In before someone cries Godwin's Law. ;)

1 point

Stop teen pregnancy. ... take it in the ass ladies. 😉

I would just opt for blow jobs. ;)

1 point

Yeah, that would also work.

1 point

You could invest in improving the quality of life of impoverished peoples, because this correlates to having fewer children at a societal level.

Or, you could make it worse and make sure they never reach reproductive age ;)

joecavalry(37423) Clarified
1 point

I'm sorry..., I had a shitty day. I was trying to be funny and I see how my comment can be construed as being flippant and uncaring. I know that the politically correct thing to say is, "Save everyone." even though I know that is not possible ;)

1 point

A higher quality of life definitely correlates with less children. The problem is that the transition usually comes with a population boom before people settle in to a better life and slow down the baby mill.

1 point

Do you want an actual answer? cuz I've got one, but it's pretty drastic.

As an actual answer, we do what China has done. Limit the number of children each family can have, and impose penalties on those who exceed the limit, just to enforce it.

That would do a great, albeit constricting, way of actually limiting the number of people populating the world. Now to deal with the actual over populated world. I say in all honestly, we start killing people. Drastic I know, but if it gets to that point we'd be doing that anyway, at least this way we can control who we want to have killed to maximize human efficiency.

I say start with the death row inmates, those who are on trial. Just skip the trial, they messed up at some point way to big to go back now at this point we've come to.

Next if the population isn't low enough, the for life prisoners. They were in it for the long haul, at least now we've saved money, we've saved food, and we've reduced the population.

After that, we make a very subjective decision. We kill off the prisoners who were imprisoned( for any amount of time) for crimes we've deemed too unfit to be in modern society, just as a suggestion, I'd say those killers, and at least the rapists. Not all the rapists, just the ones having non conceptual sex, with someone under 16. That's just my opinion though.

A practical application seems unlikely to get global consent, making it less practical than it seems on paper.

The thing is, carrying capacity is its own limit. We won't ever get much above it because the very nature of it means a percentage of people equal the percentage above the limit will soon die off due to lack of resources. These kinds of culls happen naturally in the wild all the time.

Of course, most species aren't as globally destructive as we are....

Find more life sustainable planets.

If we can safely colonize Mars and the Moon, we'll be able to split up the population.

Imagine going to some other planet that could sustain life.

I believe a planet like this exists, because Earth can't possibly be the only planet with life. If another planet has life, then it can sustain life. If it can sustain life, then there's a possibility we could move some of our population to that planet.

But...

A more practical solution is to make an artificial environment on Mars and on the Moon.

This would still serve its purpose for the time being...

We wouldn't have to kill anyone. Instead (obviously already implied), people would just move. We could have 3 billion people on Earth instead of 7 billion.

1 billion could go the the moon.

3 billion could go to Mars.

OR...

Steps:

1. ruin the environment (this it not my recommended method)

2. build a fuckton more cities in every place possible

3. start killing pregnant mothers until the ratio of guys to girls is 2:1.

4. congrats, you just immorally slowed down the population growth

Its not our fault an African woman had 13 kids she couldn't feed. Heres a solution, Don't have kids unless you know you can feed to adulthood.

King0Mir(66) Disputed
1 point

The grim fact is, an African woman with 13 kids is more likely to have a child survive to adulthood than an African woman with 1 child. So African women may be better off having 13 kids.

1 point

Why do they have to have kids? Why don't they make a healthy government first?

DrawFour(2662) Clarified
1 point

I absolutely love how it has to be an African woman....

1 point

They're the ones who can't raise their kids too adulthood.

Education through birth control will help to alleviate overpopulation.