HOME | DD

#infomercial #walfas #politicalcartoon
Published: 2018-08-08 20:07:55 +0000 UTC; Views: 560; Favourites: 6; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Less kids - More food to go around.
Less kids - More land to go around.
Less kids - Higher wages.
What is not to love?
Related content
Comments: 16
Fidens9 [2018-08-08 22:59:45 +0000 UTC]
i don't see how less kids equals higher wages. people are greedy but that's just human nature, just cause employers have less workers doesn't mean they are required to pay them more. only the law can 100% guarantee higher wages.
that aside. yeah the world does have an overpopulation problem. if humanity is to have a future a massive decrease in birth rate is pretty much required.
my solution would be to make it required by law that when men sire kids and women give birth they must go through an operation so they can't do it again. of course once the problem is fixed the law should be repealed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AvantSolAce In reply to Fidens9 [2018-08-08 23:16:46 +0000 UTC]
You are half-correct about the higher wages thing. In modern day corporations it is incredibly easy to get labor, thus if someone does not like what they are being paid they can be replaced extremely easily. However this was not always the case. Before the population boom work positions were actually rather hard to fill. Companies had to compete with each other to attract workers. They typically did this by offering better wages and benefits. If the modern working human population were to dip to pre-boom numbers, companies would once again need to attract workers via higher wages and benefits, or risk shutting down from under-staffing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
FlareKyn [2018-08-08 22:12:24 +0000 UTC]
Yo, announcer guy talking from who knows where. You do know your "solution" will cause human extinction, right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AvantSolAce In reply to FlareKyn [2018-08-08 23:09:11 +0000 UTC]
Humans live an average of 80 years, with most females remaining fertile until their mid-40s. Even if everyone simply stopped having kids, there would be a good 30-40 year amnesty period before humans actually risked endangerment. And even if this period was passed, medical science would have advanced enough to increase human fertility ranges or even provide viable artificial conditions for embryonic growth. Even now, the preservation of sperm and eggs is a very stable science.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
FlareKyn In reply to AvantSolAce [2018-08-08 23:45:58 +0000 UTC]
That's a possibility, yes, but what if it doesn't happen?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AvantSolAce In reply to FlareKyn [2018-08-09 00:24:52 +0000 UTC]
Well I don't think people would just stop having kids. It'd take some sort of evil genius to pull that off.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Neppedupplayer [2018-08-08 22:02:17 +0000 UTC]
Less kids also equals less love in people's life.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AvantSolAce In reply to Neppedupplayer [2018-08-08 23:04:49 +0000 UTC]
Love is temporary. Economic tranquility is eternal.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Creatorofmaymays In reply to AvantSolAce [2021-07-08 20:51:24 +0000 UTC]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AvantSolAce In reply to Creatorofmaymays [2021-07-12 23:24:05 +0000 UTC]
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
nightmare7234 In reply to nightmare7234 [2018-08-08 20:11:31 +0000 UTC]
That and having no kids little boy will cause our extinction.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
illuminatitriforce In reply to nightmare7234 [2018-08-29 03:06:29 +0000 UTC]
you say that like it's a bad thing
👍: 0 ⏩: 0