China's Electronic Waste Village

[dannyf]

Reduction in "emissions", ...  also allows technology growth, health care development etc. which allows more thorough utilization of resources.

It is not difficult to think of a scenario where resources directed towards emission reductions could have been directed towards people, or technology, or healthcare, etc.

The challenge is for the society to make that trade off, where / where and how such redirection / allocation of resources should take place.

[VK3DRB]

We are overpopulated. Big problem, no answers. No one has ever come up with a solution that does not violate human rights.

In China, the one child policy had very some bad side effects, like abortions of babies just because of they were females. Look at the ratio and male to females in China and do the maths - the results are horrifying.

[coppice]

We are overpopulated. Big problem, no answers. No one has ever come up with a solution that does not violate human rights.

In China, the one child policy had very some bad side effects, like abortions of babies just because of they were females. Look at the ratio and male to females in China and do the maths - the results are horrifying.

Big problem, several answers. We just don't like the answers. One thing is clear, though. China's approach has been much kinder and gentler than nature's ways of fixing population imbalances.

[CatalinaWOW]

In my home state of Colorado there is a long standing joke about the difference between an environmentalist and a developer.  The difference?  The environmentalist already has his vacation cabin.

[coppice]

We are overpopulated. Big problem, no answers. No one has ever come up with a solution that does not violate human rights.

In China, the one child policy had very some bad side effects, like abortions of babies just because of they were females. Look at the ratio and male to females in China and do the maths - the results are horrifying.

Big problem, several answers. We just don't like the answers. One thing is clear, though. China's approach has been much kinder and gentler than nature's ways of fixing population imbalances.

Interesting to hear China's one child policy described as "kinder and gentler". I suppose the Nazi's approach was more brutal.

QUICK!!!! Somebody go get Godwin!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

I don't think humans have every approached the brutality with which nature acts.

[Kjelt]

All theoretical blabla till it touches YOUR life.

Example: I can not think of any reason why we should keep a 3 months to early born babies alive in an incubator till it has enough strength to survive, where it is already proven they will have severe problems later in life due to detachment, undeveloped other parts of the body, many weaknesses etc. etc.
BUT if it is your child will you again think like that ? 
We have a bible in our family from the 18th century and on the first pages all births and deaths of the family are registered. From the average 8 children born more than 4 would die before age 4. The result is that only the strong survive. Nowadays every baby survives but the human race has never been so weak with all kinds of allergies and other illments. Still if it is your baby laying in that incubator it is a total different story than theoretically blabla. Same goes for surgery, do we really need to operate on 80 years and older humans or do we accept that we some day have to die and that some age is good enough? Still nice theoretically blabla till it is you at age 85 that is lying in that hospitalbed, will you stick to your story?

So why bringing this up, with all the previous pages SF virus bullshit talk, it is very clear to me that whoever is stupid enough to decide something like that should never act alone.
It should be at least an unanimous 50 person decision of 50 persons that do have relatives and family and the first persons to go should be those 50 people with all their relatives if they decide to do something stupid like that.
Lets see if that decision is ever going to be made, I don't think so. 

[Zero999]

All theoretical blabla till it touches YOUR life.

Example: I can not think of any reason why we should keep a 3 months to early born babies alive in an incubator till it has enough strength to survive, where it is already proven they will have severe problems later in life due to detachment, undeveloped other parts of the body, many weaknesses etc. etc.
BUT if it is your child will you again think like that ? 
We have a bible in our family from the 18th century and on the first pages all births and deaths of the family are registered. From the average 8 children born more than 4 would die before age 4. The result is that only the strong survive. Nowadays every baby survives but the human race has never been so weak with all kinds of allergies and other illments. Still if it is your baby laying in that incubator it is a total different story than theoretically blabla. Same goes for surgery, do we really need to operate on 80 years and older humans or do we accept that we some day have to die and that some age is good enough? Still nice theoretically blabla till it is you at age 85 that is lying in that hospitalbed, will you stick to your story?

So why bringing this up, with all the previous pages SF virus bullshit talk, it is very clear to me that whoever is stupid enough to decide something like that should never act alone.
It should be at least an unanimous 50 person decision of 50 persons that do have relatives and family and the first persons to go should be those 50 people with all their relatives if they decide to do something stupid like that.
Lets see if that decision is ever going to be made, I don't think so. 

The difference is nowadays people use contraception which offsets that.

If a child dies, then it's upsetting but the couple will try again and once they have enough children start using contraception again.

I doubt allowing the premature to survive has anything to do with allergies. It's more likely to be linked to the immune system not being exposed to beneficial  bacteria due to improved hygiene and sanitation.

You're right that allowing the weaker to survive will reduce the strength of the human race but a couple of generations is far too soon for that to happen to a significant degree.  However, in the long term, mortality rates will increase again to offset those improvements and the really weak will always have a lower chance or reproducing.

Only humans are capable of being cruel. Nature doesn't have the ability to reason so is amoral. What goes on in China and North Korea is barbaric because it's caused by humans, who are capable of rationalising the impact of their actions on others. Ebola is not barbaric, even though it's killed thousands of people because it's just a dumb virus.

[dannyf]

BUT if it is your child will you again think like that ?

Very difficult question, even if it is not personal. Bio-ethicists for example have questioned the value of modern medicine for the advancement of humanity for precisely the reasons you cited.

I think a rationale person can make good arguments on either side but valid objections can be raised to arguments on either side.

[VK3DRB]

The South Australian Government is considering making a nuclear waste dump in their backyard because they want money. Today they triggered the debate. This is in a state where the British dropped atomic bombs and sent radioactive fallout across much of Australia. The Poms paid some millions of pounds to clean up their mess, but none of that money went to help the hundreds of Australian troops who were used as guinea pigs. The hypocrisy and stupidity of the South Australian government beggars belief. There should be no debate by dickhead politicians... the answer should be a big NO, NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

However, ironically Australia mines uranium mostly from South Australia and ships it abroad, to the blessing of mining shareholders and the state and federal governments. In fact Australian uranium was in each of the reactors in Fukushima. You won't hear any politicians mentioning that and it does not make the general media.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nuclear_tests_at_Maralinga

The pollution from E-Waste and N-Waste... it seems they are not important if there is money to be made by politicians or the greedy elite.

[Mechanical Menace]

The South Australian Government is considering making a nuclear waste dump in their backyard because they want money. Today they triggered the debate. This is in a state where the British dropped atomic bombs and sent radioactive fallout across much of Australia. The Poms paid some millions of pounds to clean up their mess, but none of that money went to help the hundreds of Australian troops who were used as guinea pigs.

To be fair our government used our soldiers as guinea pigs too, and on more occasions. Nothing went to them either. And it wouldn't surprise me if those in command of your forces were more than aware and just as happy to use their troops for the information. I don't believe claims that that late on no one was aware of the risks, especially given both countries major involvement in the Manhattan project even with the Yanks deciding the manpower and money we put into it wasn't worth sharing the research they agreed to...

[VK3DRB]

The South Australian Government is considering making a nuclear waste dump in their backyard because they want money. Today they triggered the debate. This is in a state where the British dropped atomic bombs and sent radioactive fallout across much of Australia. The Poms paid some millions of pounds to clean up their mess, but none of that money went to help the hundreds of Australian troops who were used as guinea pigs.

To be fair our government used our soldiers as guinea pigs too, and on more occasions. Nothing went to them either. And it wouldn't surprise me if those in command of your forces were more than aware and just as happy to use their troops for the information. I don't believe claims that that late on no one was aware of the risks, especially given both countries major involvement in the Manhattan project even with the Yanks deciding the manpower and money we put into it wasn't worth sharing the research they agreed to...

The Menzies government were lap dogs for the British government. Whatever the Mother Country wanted, it was granted. Roberts Menzies was a bit of a fool...

I believe the British government did compensate its own troops who were exposed. And you are right, these governments knew what they were doing. The Australian government is waiting for the servicemen to die to avoid having to pay serious compensation not only to those who were affected, but their children and grandchildren too who may have genetic defects. It would open a pandora's box, not only to the servicemen and the Aborigines, but to the people of Brisbane and Adelaide as well. In Brisbane there was even black rain on one occasion. Where do you draw the line?

[Mechanical Menace]

I believe the British government did compensate its own troops who were exposed.

I wish I could say that was true, but unfortunately we can't take the high ground on this one.

Stuff like that makes me really understand why people don't trust science claims from governments, but unfortunately that added with a massive amount of scientific illiteracy even amongst bright, technical minded people leads to ludicrous conspiracy theories about whole branches of science.

[rollatorwieltje]

We are overpopulated. Big problem, no answers. No one has ever come up with a solution that does not violate human rights.

In China, the one child policy had very some bad side effects, like abortions of babies just because of they were females. Look at the ratio and male to females in China and do the maths - the results are horrifying.

Improving quality of life seems to slow the birth rate significantly. In most western countries the rate of natural increase is about 0, some countries even show negative numbers.

[GreyWoolfe]

That won't help if my neighbor is allowed to throw stuff over the fence by the law that is maintained on his side of the fence. I.e. China creates massive amounts of air pollution and I can't do anything about it in my neighboring country.

Not just your Country.

China might be responsible for our horrible winters, says NASA

I wonder whether it also affects the winters in Europe. In the NL the winters have been particulary crappy as well. No snow and no ice at all.
This sight would freak my wife out though:

From: http://www.theloop.ca/these-are-the-most-epic-snowfall-images-youll-ever-see/

My wife is a military brat.  Her adoptive father was Coast Guard.  When they were stationed at a light house in Maine, she remembers her father going out the 2nd floor window to shovel the snow away from the front door and create a walkway to the light house.

All theoretical blabla till it touches YOUR life.

Example: I can not think of any reason why we should keep a 3 months to early born babies alive in an incubator till it has enough strength to survive, where it is already proven they will have severe problems later in life due to detachment, undeveloped other parts of the body, many weaknesses etc. etc.
BUT if it is your child will you again think like that ? 
We have a bible in our family from the 18th century and on the first pages all births and deaths of the family are registered. From the average 8 children born more than 4 would die before age 4. The result is that only the strong survive. Nowadays every baby survives but the human race has never been so weak with all kinds of allergies and other illments. Still if it is your baby laying in that incubator it is a total different story than theoretically blabla. Same goes for surgery, do we really need to operate on 80 years and older humans or do we accept that we some day have to die and that some age is good enough? Still nice theoretically blabla till it is you at age 85 that is lying in that hospitalbed, will you stick to your story?

So why bringing this up, with all the previous pages SF virus bullshit talk, it is very clear to me that whoever is stupid enough to decide something like that should never act alone.
It should be at least an unanimous 50 person decision of 50 persons that do have relatives and family and the first persons to go should be those 50 people with all their relatives if they decide to do something stupid like that.
Lets see if that decision is ever going to be made, I don't think so. 

I was one of those incubator babies-6 weeks worth.  I was born 1.5 months premature, a "blue baby" with RH disease in the 1950's.  I was told that I had to have a complete blood transfusion at birth and I have a serious scar on my right elbow to show for it.  Certainly, my parents didn't think about just letting me die.  The only health issues are some cirrhosis of the liver-my own stupidity and obesity-again, my own stupidity.  Outside of those 2 things-healthy as a horse as they say.   My grandparents on my mother's side had 20 children, half of them made it to adulthood.

[Mechanical Menace]

...

I'm not judging here just commenting to keep a balance. I do half get where you're coming from that those without the resources shouldn't have children they can't provide for. But there is a good argument for the position that the low level of education is the cause, not the symptom...

[Zero999]

You need $$$ to be educated.

Most (good, up to spec) Chinese primary and middle schools are so corrupted that they will not accept a kid if the parents don't "donate" enough money to the school.

I "donated" at least 10k USD (past number, 3-4x more now) only for primary and middle school education.

Consider the average GDP in my hometown is only 11.5K USD/year, and real estate is more expensive than most part of the USA, you can have a figure how much it cost to survive, let along raising 2 kids.

The only reason I can have US education is that my grandparents are entrepreneurs, so they left behind some heritage. I can not imagine how a poor rural parent feel when they saw the GRE score sheet of their kid. Their kid has done everything to the best, just they can not afford the tuition.

I agree with you that people shouldn't have children if they can't afford them.

No one's bashing you personally because you're from China.

I don't think simply banning people from having more children is the correct way of dealing with this problem.

Don't take criticism of the Chinese government from foreigners personally.

You can say what you like about the UK government and it wouldn't upset me.

[dannyf]

the one child policy granted the entire family resources to the only kid, so he/she can have better development

It is a tough question and obviously both sides have a point.

Personally, I think China took the right decision for population control, then and now.

However, I would not go so far to say that such a decision would be the right decision if / when applied to a different country or at a different point in time.

The important thing is to let the people decide.

[Mechanical Menace]

You need $$$ to be educated.

...

The only reason I can have US education is that my grandparents are entrepreneurs, so they left behind some heritage. I can not imagine how a poor rural parent feel when they saw the GRE score sheet of their kid. Their kid has done everything to the best, just they can not afford the tuition.

And that was what I was saying the problem is. You can't really blame those with no chance of gaining even "standard" education for making mistakes it's pretty much proven is generally the result of a lack of education...

Sorry you sort of sounded like you were "blaming" the kids/parents you feel sorry for to begin with

EDIT: And by "making mistakes it's pretty much proven is generally the result of a lack of education" I meant using contraception or using it properly as a big example.

[dannyf]

-To all westerners-

I would argue that the democracy practiced in most western countries are actually a form of tyranny (of the majority). It is more about legalized robbery. Todays Greece would be a great example of that.

The history of china is very interesting. For the large part of human history, china absolutely dominated. If someone were to judge humanity by its property some 1000s of years ago, they would have concluded that feudalism is the proven way to liberty, .

Over the last 30 year, the capitalist Chinese government has lifted more people out of poverty and created wealth than anyone.

It will be interesting to see where china goes from here.

[SeanB]

Vote early vote often. Can't remember who said it, but they also voted the cemetery and the preschool. The prisoners also vote, though those boxes often come to the counting stations with the votes inside neatly stacked.

[nctnico]

To all westerners, you can bash me, but I don't give human right a shit. Poor and uneducated parents shouldn't gave multiple kids, because they can not give their kids the best. By granting the parents rights to freely give birth, it deprives the rights of development of the poor kids.

I'm not going to bash you but thank you for your insight on how things work in China.

A century ago it was still the same in Europe. People had many kids so they could rely on the children supporting them at old age. Also infant mortality was high. If I look at my family tree I can see that my grandfather had several siblings which didn't make it beyond 5 or 6 years. If you have 8 kids one of them probably makes something out of his/her life and can support the parents. Kids where regarded a pension fund back then. Still a big family makes it easier to pull resources together and help each other. If you have 5 or 6 siblings it is easier to take turns for taking care of a family member.

[Zero999]

Perhaps the Chinese government should encourage parents to have more girls rather than boys?

Having too many men and not enough women can cause more problems with crime and disorder.

Maybe give women money for every daughter they produce?

-To all westerners-

I would argue that the democracy practiced in most western countries are actually a form of tyranny (of the majority). It is more about legalized robbery. Todays Greece would be a great example of that.

I think you have that wrong. I don’t know about your Country but here voter turn out has steadily been declining, typically it’s at around 50% of eligible voters. That means in order for a majority government you need 51% of the eligible voters which translates to 25.5% of the adult population. When you factor in people selecting the best of a bad lot its more like maybe 10% of the population actually agree with the government’s policy.

Given how bloated the governments have become, particularly in western democracies essentially its people voting to keep their government jobs. This is particularly true of the current Ontario liberal government using tax dollars to buy votes by hiring more civil servants. Essentially this amounts to high paid welfare.

So really it’s not tyranny of the majority its tyranny of the minority. I myself haven’t voted in years, I can’t stand any of the parties they are all a bunch of crooked incompetent asses. I’ve said as much to them when they canvas door to door.

There's no such thing as a perfect democracy. There are only different shades of authoritarianism from the absolute dictatorships such as North Korea to almost liberal Sweden.

Generally more wealth leads to more liberal governments but it isn't always the case with Singapore and the oil rich states of the middle east being very authoritarian.

China has become less authoritarian as it's become richer.

[zapta]

Perhaps the Chinese government should encourage parents to have more girls rather than boys?

Perhaps we should tax people that promote sexism?

[zapta]

-To all westerners-

I would argue that the democracy practiced in most western countries are actually a form of tyranny (of the majority). It is more about legalized robbery. Todays Greece would be a great example of that.

We got here to a tipping point where half of the adults do not pay income tax so they don't care about the others paying more.

And then we have the tyranny of the non elected bureaucracy which keeps growing and controls our lives with rules and regulations that include additional taxes ('fees') and fines.

The cause root is that our schools are controlled by monopolistic public union members that live of taxes money and naturally teach our kids collectivism rather than personal liberty.

[coppice]

Perhaps the Chinese government should encourage parents to have more girls rather than boys?

For city people its quite the fashion now to want girls. I think country people still want boys.