Watch now | In this thought-provoking episode, Malcolm and Simone Collins discuss a controversial Lancet study funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that predicts a dramatic decline in global fertility rates by 2100. The couple delves into the study's alarming implications, including the potential for wealthy nations to exploit impoverished countries as "human farms" to sustain their economies through immigration. Malcolm and Simone also examine the study's celebration of population decline as a "success story" and its call for explicitly left-wing solutions to rebuild society. Throughout the conversation, they critique the study's assumptions, highlight the ethical concerns surrounding coercive immigration policies, and warn of the long-term consequences of treating human beings as mere economic resources.
I hate government handouts, but it is the better of two evils.
Further, the incentive would only be given to those who choose embryo selection for high cognitive ability plus other positive traits.
Speaking of handouts, the government is giving money to people who don't work. Perhaps if that policy were stopped, we would have enough people at the current birth rate. It's worth a try. Too few people are contributing to the betterment of humanity.
I mean sure it could be a way except it doesn’t work. It’s not working in S. Korea and doesn’t work anywhere else. Simone and Malcolm have discussed that at length and concluded that paying people to procreate doesn’t work and isn’t working at all.
1. As a practical matter mass immigration from SSA is unlikely to happen in receiving countries that are democracies. Old people vote against increasing immigration. You can't age your way out of this, because with low fertility, each succeeding generation is smaller than the one before, so old people will always dominate politics. Democracy will have to go.
2. As you have said before, Malcolm, immigrants can't fix the fertility of the native population. Mass immigration is not a solution and will have a host of negative effects on the receiving countries.
3. As you say, the proposed mass immigration is morally abhorrent because it deprives source countries of desparately needed talent and deliberately impoverishes them. This isn't likely to stop the current crop of totalitarian fascists who call themselves liberals, though.
4. The mental framework of the paper's authors is flawed and also morally abhorrent. To them, the important thing is maintaining economic growth, not people's wellbeing. Aggregate economic growth was just a policy tool to achieve improved wellbeing. With shrinking populations, it ceases to be a useful tool. We need less stupid elites.
Just force people to have babies by withdrawing rights if they don’t…
How about the carrot approach?
Gov. Handouts?
"Gov. Handouts?"
I hate government handouts, but it is the better of two evils.
Further, the incentive would only be given to those who choose embryo selection for high cognitive ability plus other positive traits.
Speaking of handouts, the government is giving money to people who don't work. Perhaps if that policy were stopped, we would have enough people at the current birth rate. It's worth a try. Too few people are contributing to the betterment of humanity.
I mean sure it could be a way except it doesn’t work. It’s not working in S. Korea and doesn’t work anywhere else. Simone and Malcolm have discussed that at length and concluded that paying people to procreate doesn’t work and isn’t working at all.
However, your comment does not address the quality vs. quantity issue. We do not need more people; we need more quality people.
Stop paying people not to work.
I agree in principle but I’m not sure how it relates. Even productive people are not procreating.
1. As a practical matter mass immigration from SSA is unlikely to happen in receiving countries that are democracies. Old people vote against increasing immigration. You can't age your way out of this, because with low fertility, each succeeding generation is smaller than the one before, so old people will always dominate politics. Democracy will have to go.
2. As you have said before, Malcolm, immigrants can't fix the fertility of the native population. Mass immigration is not a solution and will have a host of negative effects on the receiving countries.
3. As you say, the proposed mass immigration is morally abhorrent because it deprives source countries of desparately needed talent and deliberately impoverishes them. This isn't likely to stop the current crop of totalitarian fascists who call themselves liberals, though.
4. The mental framework of the paper's authors is flawed and also morally abhorrent. To them, the important thing is maintaining economic growth, not people's wellbeing. Aggregate economic growth was just a policy tool to achieve improved wellbeing. With shrinking populations, it ceases to be a useful tool. We need less stupid elites.
Acts of Societal Disruption. This is relevant to this topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1LnWxdfC-o
As I have said many times before, quality is always more important than quantity...including people.