# Youve got to be kidding!



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20071210/t ... 8aa_1.html


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

Sounds good to me I have 2 kids and the snip :lol: :lol:


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

I can see the logic. The least educated, and therefore least ecologically aware people in the world, tend to have the most kids. In turn, population growth and industrial development to support growing and mature economies, has had the single most significant impact on global pollution, deforestation and climate change.

Less population growth, less damage to the planet.

Would have most impact in USA, China, India and Africa - although the developed world also needs to get it's house in order. Austrailia good place to start.

I think we should be more concrned about the burgeoning population of this small isle. It's been a constant 55 million for 40 odd years, has recently grown to 60 million, mainly through immigration, and now, because of govt policy, is set to grow another 7 million (source R4 Today Prog) in next 15 years. Where are we going to put them all? think about another 7 million cars on the roads....

Given that supply and demand for housing plus the necessary infrastructure to support, are significant factors in the cost of living here, those costs are set to go in one direction only. The quality of life will surely reciprocate but in the opposite direction.

Population birth control and immigration controls (both are linked) will become higher and higher on the political agenda in coming years.

If the world's human population was managed and reduced over time, so would the negative effect on the planet pro rata.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

I agree with Gary on this one [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

You make a very good point Gary.

I dont know why I was so infuriated by this at first as I dont even have 2 children, let alone 3, nor do I anticipate having 3 chindren :lol:

I guess I just saw it an another stealth tax.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

J55TTC said:


> You make a very good point Gary.
> 
> I dont know why I was so infuriated by this at first as I dont even have 2 children, let alone 3, nor do I anticipate having 3 chindren :lol:
> 
> I guess I just saw it an another stealth tax.


I reckon Gary should be given the honourary TTF Shamen/wise man title as he seems to know everything.


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

If we are talking in terms of carbon footprints I can't think of a single decision any one of us could make that would have a greater environmental impact than the decision to have a child. Just consider the amount of waste each one of us produces during our lifetime - the amount of resources we use up and the polution and carbon emissions we generate. Each one of our children will do that.

I have eco-nerdy friends who criticise me for driving a performance sports car. They of course have children, while I have none; and I will never be having any by choice. The argument soon stops when I point out that their decision to have a child is frankly catastrophic in terms of environmental impact compared to my decision to own a TT.

I think this is a very sensible policy and a step in the right direction. Hopefully it will eventually be introduced throughout the industrialised world, including here. I'm already fed up of subsidising other people's choice to have a family - maybe this will make them think a bit harder about their choices.


----------



## robokn (Feb 21, 2006)

I think most with no kids would agree to this but those of us who are fertile see it as a load of bollocks
:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

Well I say bollox to the carbon footprint! I have a child and 3 cars :lol:


----------



## robokn (Feb 21, 2006)

Two kids, three cars, and three holidays a year :lol: :lol:


----------



## Lock_Stock (May 22, 2007)

There is a down side... look at what is happening in Japan. They have a seriously aging community. Pretty soon they will have too many Retired and not enough skilled workforce to support their economy. We need to reduce the number of kids people have but also start to euthenise old people.. 70 years is a pretty good run, then give them the heave ho....

For anyone that thinks I'm serious, flame away


----------

