Additionally, deliberately creating a shrinking population, as that site advocates, is foolish. You would create a population which necessitates inhumane treatment of non-producing members of society-- the elderly and disabled-- because there will not be enough caretakers to give them humane treatment. Every generation would see more elderly in need of care, and less people to give them that care. Add to that the disabled, and... Yeah. Bad idea. Life expectancy is growing. People need care for longer terms of years, because medical technology is extending lives. THAT is the major reason that the population is even growing at all right now. Unfortunately, that longer life also equates more care for many, if not all. And that care has to come from human beings; it can't come from machines. Either that, or we just stop the care and they die of something preventable. Life expectancy shrinks, so does the population. Lovely thought, huh?
You ever hear of the 4-2-1 problem in China? That's one child financially and morally responsible for taking care of two aging parents, and four aging grandparents, and God forbid taking care of GREAT grandparents on top of that! It's not a good goal. It's a problem. 60 and 70 year old men and women shouldn't be required to work in a factory or at a wal-mart or McDonald's because they can't afford to stop working or they starve. Where's the humanity in that? Social security does not work with a mostly-aged population. The math just doesn't work.
That is happening, all over the nation, and all over the world. In China, they actually have to actively seek out the elderly to man factories. There aren't enough young people, and otherwise, the elderly starve because their grandchildren barely make enough to support themselves and their parents.
Sorry, but... That's not a future I would wish on ANYONE, let alone a relative.
well written post!