Mayor proposes paying parents not to breed
Photo: Refracted Moments/Flickr
link:
Comments(27)
Posted By Karey - Wed, Nov 04 2009 at 9:30 AM ESTGood idea, but....
There's opportunity for it to be exploited. Want some cash from the government? Have a kid, abuse the tar out of it, get kid taken away, get $ to not have any more. There's not much pre-emptive about this; in order for the family to be eligible for this cash incentive, they have to be already treating children wrongly.
Posted By superchicken - Wed, Nov 04 2009 at 7:42 AM ESTJust the start
I think it's refreshing to hear this kind of clear headed thinking for a change. The truth is that such a policy should be expanded far beyond the scope suggested. There are people that simply should not be allowed to legally reproduce.
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 11:15 PM ESTStrange but
Why shouldn't crack mom who burns the baby with cigarettes be sterilized? And the list goes on from here.
Posted By Inexistencia - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 5:34 PM ESTEugenics Ethics for Capitalist Ideals
Overpopulation does not depend only on the size or density of the population, but on the ratio of population to available sustainable resources. It also depends on the means of resources used and distributed throughout the population. If a given environment has a population of 10 individuals, but there is food or drinking water enough for only 9, then in a closed system where no trade is possible, that environment is overpopulated since population numbers is still in excess of food production..... More
Posted By Rache - Fri, Nov 06 2009 at 8:39 AM ESTDouble standards
Don't adoption agencies do this very thing though? Assess your "suitability" to adopt based on your background and financial history and stability?? Nobody calls them Nazis though?
An adoption agency can turn away a skanky benefit claiming couple with a ropey background on the grounds they are "unsuitable" yet that same couple could go home and have their own baby and nobody will remove it from them because they are "unsuitable". It's double standards.
Posted By Historian - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 5:33 PM ESTEugenics History
The application of eugenics is ultimately detrimental for the long term survival of the species. You want the greatest diversity possible in the gene pool so that species continuation is assured.
What if a lethal pandemic occurred, and only individuals with a particular genetic marker were immune? Sound far fetched? What about malaria and sickle cell anemia?
Eugenics programs in the US in the early 20th century led to the mass sterilization of the mentally incompetent. The results.... More
Posted By RR - Wed, Nov 04 2009 at 12:19 AM ESTWho Cares?
What good is having "the greatest diversity possible in the gene pool so that species continuation is assured" when it comes at the price of having a gene pool filled with stupid people? I'd rather we take our chances breeding only the best and have a pandemic wipe us all out than have to spend so much as a day surrounded by people who think their children are their welfare ticket.
Posted By Sheree - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 4:33 PM ESTMayor proposes paying parents not to breed
When the person has already proven themselves to be a deadbeat parent or is convicted of crimes against the defenseless, I think it would be a great idea to withhold all their 'welfare'-type government benefits until they are sterilized.
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 3:51 PM ESTA solution to "The Abbo Problem"?
Somehow sounds familiar..
Posted By colin - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 3:37 PM ESThmm
He's not suggesting genetic factors be the reason for not having children. Comparing the idea to what the Nazi's tried to accomplish is just ignorant.
Posted By Loxodonta - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 3:24 PM ESTDisgusting
To all those closet Nazi's who think this is a good idea. It's only a good until they single you out! Too fat? too tall? Too many freckles? Blonde & blue eyed (considered to be a weak gene compared to dark eyes & hair) where do you draw the line...?
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 3:30 PM ESTLine drawer
It's quite easy to draw the line. You draw the line by those people with a history of violent crime, particularly that crime which is directed at vulnerable individuals.
Posted By Aaron - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:48 PM ESTA good re-implementation of eugenics
I've thought about this for awhile and while in theory I think eugenics is a good idea, practically it usually slides down that slippery slope way too fast. Instead of 'forcing' high risk groups to sterilize you reward them for not being a burden on society thus making it voluntary and a win for people that never wanted children probably helping them lead better/more productive lives. To those that want to have children, there is no punishment for them.
It's an interesting discussion.... More
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:45 PM ESTDo it faster than later
It's unfortunate that the slums of our nation are kept afloat by those who work. I'm tired of paying for detritus and expect nothing more than America melting down if it continues for longer than it has already...with this new administration, it scorns those who work hard and try to help themselves to be better...the new motto seems to be, "why work when the government will pay for everything you want." Pay them no more than what they are getting for free. You learn very important life.... More
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:38 PM ESTI agree
I think it's a good idea too, we can sit back and let the population get to 9 billion. The earth just can not sustain. I'm not a criminal but I do realize that we live in a time where there are to many people so I would gladly take a pay check not to have kids.
Posted By James - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:32 PM ESTPerhaps take a look at 1930s around germany
Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it
Posted By Sam Hall - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 3:17 PM ESTRe: Perhaps take a look at 1930s around germany
That's right, I forgot about the voluntary concentration camps.
Posted By Don - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:30 PM ESTWhat a Slippery Slope
Once everyone is comfortable with this approach, we can then move onto other topics as .... your ugly you shouldn't breed or man you show no potential you shouldn't breed either.
Rather than shoving the issue of violence, etc under the rug why don't we as a society, via the government, try to break the root of the problem. To blame genes alone is pure folly.
Posted By Tristan - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:57 PM ESTActually...
Yeah, we should do that. People with bad genes shouldn't breed, because it's not kind to the children or the population as a whole. If you knew without a doubt that by mating with your wife you would produce a child with a congenital heart defect that would require a heart transplant by the age of 18 to avoid premature death, would you still have the child? To say yes is absolutely preposterous, because you can adopt a perfectly healthy child and get the benefits of being a family without the.... More
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:29 PM ESTWhy not
I think this is an awesome idea, we need to finally do something with population controll
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:23 PM ESThmmm
I would much rather have people who can barely take care of themselves have a bunch of children. That is the better idea.
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:20 PM ESTI like it...
People with high levels of Criminal activity shouldn't breed anyway, I don't know if I'd pay them so much as maybe offer a % off their jail time if they were to be sterilized. Thus saving the government money instead of having it cost more.
It costs $30,000 (roughly) to house an inmate in a jail for one year. Offer a year or two off of a person's 20 year sentence and they still serve plenty of time and the government can put that 30-60K towards the deficit.
Posted By alirg - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:15 PM ESTWow
Sterilize criminals... seems like two things that go together.
Posted By dirk - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:12 PM ESTGreat idea
The earth is already over-populated. This is a great idea. I think the outrage probably comes from people who think that procreation is the purpose of life. It's a concepts taught in many religions that is extremely dangerous to our survival as a species on this planet.
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Nov 03 2009 at 2:04 PM ESTNot a bad idea...
This is actually a good idea. Why the outrage?



Facebook
Stumble
Tweet
Digg
Link














Stevo
Just offer $10,000 for sterilization to anyone. Anyone who would look at that money as being better than having kids probably should be sterilized. That takes away all the aggravation and hand wringing about whether it's ethical, or government should dicatate. No dictation--just a cash offer. It only applies to those under the age of 35.