Would you have sex for your country?

[StrongInTheArm]

In many Western countries the population has started falling noticeably. Italy and Japan are examples that spring to mind.

In Ulyanovsk, a region of Russia, this is such a worry that for the third year running the governor has declared a special day for couples to stay at home and procreate.

"Demographers estimate that Russia could lose 40 million people - almost a third of its current population - by the middle of the century."

"A combination of falling birth rates, emigration and an ailing healthcare system has led to the decline."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6990802.stm

Looking at those I know in the UK, few have more than two children, many have only one. If this is replicated nationwide, then a decline in population size would normally be expected.

If your politicians called on you to get down and dirty with your partner with the aim of a bundle of joy in nine months, would you?

[Sadierhianne]

Only if they offered me three times the amount of current child benefit - they must have no idea how expensive teenagers are.

anne

[Sadierhianne]

was it a serious question?

It is quite worrying that a government, those people who we are supposed to trust to make retional decisions for a country can consider that it is beneficial to give people a day off, to stop commerce and business for something that essentially only takes 5 minutes and could be done on a Sunday.

It is even more alarming that they don't seem to twig that women are only able to concieve on one specific day a month and it is likely that only a small minority would hit the jackpot on the actual day off. The lost revenue would be better spent on education people on when and how to concieve - this way they might have more chance of upping their population.

maybe they could borrow some people form the Uk, we seem to be getting rather crowded here.

anne

[StrongInTheArm]

Originally Posted by Sadierhianne

was it a serious question?

Anne: What do you mean was it a serious question?

It is a serious question, many countries are seeing there native populations decline, partly because people are choosing to have less children. In answer to this governments either encourage couples to have more or they encourage immigration, or indeed allow the population to fall hoping it will stabilise.

Of course in second and third world countries this isn't happening. Indeed China tried to encourage couples to only have one child for many years, unsuccessfully. It is not as though world population figures are declining, which impacts us all.

The question is if the Western countries can cause this decline in their populations then how do we translate that to third world countries too and thus benefit our species on a global scale.

It seems from the few answers to this thread that generally no one wants governments dictating to them when they should procreate.

[Julie]

I don't need a government to encourage me, but if they give us the day off work and prizes (like the Russians), that's even more reason to do it.

I don't think the US is hurting for population though.

Edit: I should add that I'd only be willing if I were with someone in a serious relationship who was also agreeable. I wouldn't go making babies with just anyone for the sake of making babies.

[Domestic Diva]

Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm

If your politicians called on you to get down and dirty with your partner with the aim of a bundle of joy in nine months, would you?

I'm not patriotic enough to fire up my baby factory again.

[G10]

Nope, I would do it because my partner and I wanted to, not because anyone else would tell, or ask me to do it.

[dee_el07]

Would you have sex for your country?

- I don't wanna have sex and do a baby for the sake of my country or just for anybody else's idea.. I wanna do it with my partner because we wanted it and with love and sincerity of course..

[Julie]

Yea, its silly to do it just because someone else tells you you should. Not everyone wants to (for whatever reason), and not everyone can (also for various reasons). Having kids is a big responsibility, and not one that should be taken lightly...and that being said, I don't have kids..but I know they're expensive, and a prize for the sake of having one wouldn't justify it at all. Imagine telling your kid one day "Well, we had you because we had the chance to win a year's supply of chocolate."

[Sadierhianne]

They cost an extortionate amount, they are a huge rsponsibility and they do need to be born out of love - i am sure that if the people in these regions wanted to have babies that they would be doing anyway - maybe the government need to look at why more women aren't having babies in that region.

I have three children and one step child.

[kristeejo]

My well is dry and rusty. It takes more than bush to make a baby.

[KeithCash]

Originally Posted by kristeejo

My well is dry and rusty. It takes more than bush to make a baby.

+

[Sadierhianne]

I think that governments dictating is wrong. Their methods of bribing births are ridiculous and maybe they would be better looking at why the poulation has decreased.

There are schools in the Uk with only two pupils - i don't see our government telling the parents of those under populated areas that they can have a bar of chocolate and offering them a day off to ttc. There are many underpopulatd areas but this is mainly due to geographical issues, there are also vast areas of over population and so how do you measure ratio of population per square foot of land?

I live on the edge of moorland about 8 miles out of Manchester, there are going to be fewer babies here than there are in densly populated areas close to the City and on the basis that the Russian government appear to be slighly undereducated in their methods of promoting population, it might be suitable to consider that they may be missing the real picture. Maybe the habitants of the seemingly underpopulated areas simply moved out of town, died, emigrated to the Uk or whatever.

Maybe at some stage the countries like Rumania might realise that their population is decreasing and of course it is, their population are seeking assylum elsewhere. Some of the western countries probably need to address why their people are so desperate to move out of that country and address that issue first.

It suggests to me that maybe people are choosing not to have babies for a good reason - poverty being one of them perhaps? There has to be a bigger picture as to why any population decreases or indeed increases.

Everyone should have the choice to have children when they choose - personally i'd love another few children BUT finances don't allow, hmm neither does age, so there are two good reasons why i can't generate more people to boost our population, you could give me a year off work and a lifetime supply of chcolate and it ain't happening - sadly.

anne

[pctec]

Absolutely NOT!

[robert s.]

Honestly - not much problem here with the sex part!! in fact: every government can send me every women below 40 and below 80 kg (well 65kg) and i volunteer as much as i can....(not that it would be THAT impressive!)

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by robert s.

Honestly - not much problem here with the sex part!! in fact: every government can send me every women below 40 and below 80 kg (well 65kg) and i volunteer as much as i can....(not that it would be THAT impressive!)

Go lay down by your dish Robert.

[Brian]

All those for more population control say yay.

Yay

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Brian

All those for more population control say yay.

Yay

Nay.

All those for freedom, say Yay.

[ewomack]

Freedom sometimes comes at a price. We have finite resources and an ever expanding population. If we either can't reduce population rates or find some miraculous way to feed more and more people then we could face a future massive die-off. Does that mean government should control birth rates? I don't know. But I don't find the decreasing birth rate disturbing. I think it's just what we need right now. Of course it shouldn't go down too much...

[chicgeek]

yay