Discussing population without enfolding consumption is, I believe, useless. So, even if you are talking about encouraging people to have less children through any number of ways (that word "implement" is quite the bad choice: suggests that there's a top-down, one-person-in-control decision maker), you've got to bring in consumption, which also impacts earth's resources. Now, Angela, you ask who would "implement" this? Well, what about a world where regional "solutions" are proposed? For example, the US encourages (through education, easy access to information, birth control, etc.) a certain number of children AND a reduced (not merely recycling, the panacea of way too many) use of resources, everything from driving to throwing away restaurant food to buying less. Then, how about India encouraging a certain number of children (their number per family might be higher than North Americans) and providing education, healthcare, and financial opportunities for families so that some (note--_some_) of the cultural need to have children (high mortality rate, etc.) is mitigated. And, so on... The way it's been discussed, it's been as if someone believes that a dept. (or some other such thing)of population will proclaim *a* number for everyone on the planet. To some degree, population information (not consumption, mind you) is having an effect in the US. We have low birth rates. The UN (with a consistent supply of funds and medical personnel from every, EVERY country on board) could be an organization which spearheads such an effort. Note, it's an effort--not mandatory compliance. However, cultural morays are very powerful, so once there are inroads, they would take over. I worry, however, about the time element, how long it takes for these things to get up and running and to continue to seep into public consciousness. Arlene Plevin On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Joe E. Dees wrote: > > > > << Angela, population control CAN be implemented; you just DON'T > > WANT it to be. Joe > > >> > > Hi! Joe - thanks I needed a good laugh! If it CAN be implemented who will be > > charge of this vast project - you and a group of your buddies? > > > > Peace! > > Angela > > resource depletion) which will only yield to global human solutions. > The U.N., in co-operation with its member countries, would be a > good place to start. My "buddies" would be the rest of humanity - or > at least a voting democratic majority. We have the technology to > inoculate people againsy further fertility, once they have had their > allotted quota of children. If it is done evenhandedly (no exceptions > for money, power, geography, religion or complexion), the only > opposition should come from those who wish to perpetuate such > earth-destroying personal behaviors. They thus proclaim > themselves as global public enemies, and I have no problem with > mandating (and enforcing) that they receive periodical fertility > blocking injections (and I don't believe there would be any problem > finding employees to implement such a program). Joe > > >
