I'm so glad someone has the guts to say it.

two seems like the perfect number. Having two guarantees them someone to play with while their young, as well as a partner for all them video games that rock so much better if you have multiple people.

I agree, you should replace yourself, at most, but no more.

I have thought about this for a while. It is one of the 367 reasons I am never going to have a child.

Well population growth requires a 2.1 birthrate...so this guy basically wants to kill the population.

Did you know that America has the highest fertility rate of all of the developed countries with a whopping 2.1, which is exactly the replacement level. Other developed countries are below that but none are higher. This is really almost a non-issue.

It is the developing countries that are reproducing to fast, and to get them to slow down you need to change their way of life, and we know people don't like to be told to do that.

Why not change the rate of consumption instead of birth? The problems in over-population are magnified tenfold with over-consumption.

I know a family of six that has less of an effect on the environment than your average family of four.

Or you could just teach the ones you have to be more environmentally concious. But that would take too much effort, I know.

He's saying there should be no growth. That isn't the same as reducing the population.

We could certainly reduce the population, don't you think?

Personally? Oh yes, I think so. It's one reason I've chosen not to reproduce. Not the only reason, but one of them.

However...That's MY choice, for myself. It is not a judgment on those who choose to have more, or are from big families, or anything else. That's the joy of being able to choose, right?

Yeh, I've got 5 kids. I suck and am responsible for global warming. F*ck me, I hate mother earth

That said, I am raising responsible citizens, we recycle, use sustainable products, buy fresh instead of prepackaged nonsense ie. 4 pieces of fruit in a ton of plastic packaging. Also, we walk where ever we can, have an economical car and use as little energy around the house that we can. Showers instead of baths etc.

I do know lots of nuclear families who drive big gas guzzlers, don't recycle, buy s**t loads of ready meals, prepackaged foods and don't give a s**t about environmental issues. Good for them for only having 2 or less kids though

Well I would like to thank everyone who thinks they should decide how many kids I should have. I will just tell my 2 of my kids that they shouldn't exist.

If couples only had 2 kids, then our population would definitely decline, and decline fast. Not everyone in the world multiplies. You have women who choose to never marry/have children...men who choose never to marry/have children. You have people who can't have children. Lets think about the male gay couples...they either adopt, or choose surrogates... We need MORE than 1 child mom/dad produced to make up for those who are not producing.

I am one who thinks families with 10+ kids (*cough* Duggers *cough*) need to STOP, but its not my place to tell them what they can do with their reproductive organs.

Well as the father of 5 I say "screw the environment...I love my kids!!!"

However I will say that I will do more to secure a safe, healthy future for my 5 than someone who has no kids. And who knows...my #5 might be the one who finds a way to clean up the environment using laser technology. :) So why stop at 2? Do your best for the environment...breed geniuses! (Ok stretching the truth a little...but every parent thinks their kids are geniuses...at least until they are teenagers).

People who have more than two kids and raise them to be environmentally responsible are probably going to have less of an impact on the earth than a couple who raises only two kids but raises them to not give a crap.

But, the earth can only sustain so much, and in a very general sense, the population needs to stop expanding for awhile. No one is saying that it should decline and decline and decline until we no longer exist, just that it shouldn't expand and expand and expand until the earth no longer exists.

Could you say that into this microphone, please?

*contacts the FBI*

I mean, according to his idealistic view, shouldn't we all be vegan subsistence farmers too?
Because, as iamtoni78 stated, not every one multiplies. Most developing countries are merely maintain their populations. Japan's population is declining. It's really the underdeveloped and traditionally "Third World" countries that are having population booms.

Even if a family has only 2.1 children, if the population is declining by only one death relative to two births, then the pop. is still growing. 2.1 deaths/2.1 births = steady pop. size.

>2.1 deaths per 2.1 births = pop. decline.



(Father/son conversation seen on Andy Griffith)
father - the paper reads here that American families have 2.5
children

son - Wait, 2.5 kids? How do you have 2.5. kids paw?

father - Thats a ratio boy, the 0.5 is a ratio.

son - poor Horatio, the half a boy



Why don't we give out "child credits" (a la carbon credits) and those of us who don't really want kids could sell our credits to those who want more than two kids.

(removes tongue from cheek)




Don't worry though, overpopulation (locally especially) tends to naturally "thin the herd" anyway. Disease, starvation, wars for resources, increased violent crime.



What is the solution. If any of us knew we'd have a Nobel prize.

I think this is a secret ploy to get us all to masturbate more, which, considering myself, I don't think is humanly possible.