2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

SUSTAINABILITY IS NOT HAVING MORE THAN TWO CHILDREN

When a couple has four children, the next generation will be double the previous one.  This means that if everyone in the next generation uses only half of what we use now, including vital resources, they will be using the same amount of resources as this generation.  Much of what the conservationists suggest we do would be countered by people averaging more than two children.

On the other hand, if people averaged one child, the next generation would be only half the previous one and that would make many of the conservation plans unnecessary.  The number of children that parents have is the single largest determining factor in the quality of life for all in the future.  Having less children is necessary for a humane, healthy, and sustainable lifestyle.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context