Re: Civilization in SF: Threat or Menace? (was Re: The spaceship or manufactured world you would most want to live) on?

On Mon, 28 May 2007 14:19:41 +0000 (UTC), jdnicoll@xxxxxxxxx (James
Nicoll) wrote:

In article <f3enmk$1i1$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Paul Ciszek <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <f3en0i$5h0$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Inventing addictive birth control pills would be a better option.

Thus denying freewill to women, which is a surprisingly popular
[snip]
It's funny how even though making people richer is strongly
correlated with falling birth-rates, making people richer is not the
default population limitation method fans of population limitation
turn to. Why is that?

If you have a "make everyone richer" button on some appliance in your
house, go ahead and push it. If you haven't got one, birth control is
a cheaper and easier option.

Economic development is not a magic button but it exists and
works. In fact, we know from modern day examples that even very poor
nations like South Korea or Botswana in the 1960s can become relatively
well-off in only a couple of generations.
[snip]

ObSF: King Peter of Ganymede solved poverty by giving any poor people
one year to become rich. "Arrive at Easterwine" - R.A. Lafferty.

The last American president to propose the simple solution of giving
poor people money, thereby making them no longer poor was almost
lynched by his own party. Extra points for the name.

Regards,
Jack Tingle
.

Loading