Population Control – War against the Poor

Population control — War against the poor: Today, someone made me aware of an article discussing the sad state of affairs of the care for the elderly in the U.K.

The Telegraph
Elderly face NHS discrimination under new UN death targets
‘Elderly people will be treated like second-class citizens and denied medical care under new targets which give priority to saving the lives of young people’
By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor
May 29, 2015
Full story

The U.K. is not the only country in the world where the disregard for the comforts and the lives of the elderly has taken on such proportions.  Such horror stories abound in most, if not all, of the developed nations.

No one should have any illusions about a society that has no compunctions about killing off developing babies in the womb by the millions to develop any hang-ups over killing off the survivors of that method of population reduction as they become older. The only questions that come into the picture are what methods are to be used for the killing:

  1. Legalization of suicide;
  2. Legalization of assistance with suicide;
  3. Compulsory euthanasia;
  4. Limiting and even withholding of food, medication and all forms of financial support (e. g.: prohibiting the feeding and accommodation of the homeless);
  5. Promotion of voluntary and even compulsory sterilization;
  6. Criminalization of some or all forms of sexual relations that may result in procreation, in combination with substituting methods of sexual relations and acts that are known to inhibit or prevent human fertility, and
  7. Combinations and permutations of methods that will bring about a desired level of population reduction.

In any human population, a total fertility rate (TFR, the number of children born to the average woman of fertile age) of 2.1 to 2.2 children (depending on average life expectancy) for a given country is necessary to maintain the size of that population.

Influential organizations, such as USAID, the UN, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and others, have been at work for many decades to achieve the lowering of TFRs throughout the world. Billions of dollar are being spent in funding for the development and implementation of effective methods for population control, including covert and overt sterilization programs, at times implemented with the full support of military forces (e. g.: the bulldozing of slums and the compulsory sterilization of the emerging residents of those slums).

Limits to the variety and effectiveness of population control methods are set only by human imagination. What matters to the individuals who promote the world-wide population control program is only that they see the population-control methods they cause to be implemented as being absolutely necessary and that they are being made to work.

Let there be no mistake about the escalating success of the world-wide population-control program. The TFRs of more than half of all countries in the world are now at 2.1 or fewer children per average woman of fertile age. The powers feel that much more needs to be done, as the TFR for the whole world population is still at 2.43 children born to the average woman of fertile age. There is no doubt that for that reason the focus of attention for the implementation of effective population-control measures is presently on the most fertile nations in Africa.

Poverty kills. One way to ensure that will happen is to prevent poor countries (specifically those in Africa) from having cheap and universally-available electricity.  The best way to achieve that is to curtail the funding necessary to finance the development of large-scale projects for the generation and distribution of electricity.

Obviously, extremely poor countries do not have the means to fund such billion-dollar projects, requiring roughly $2 billion per GW of power generation capacity, of which many, hundreds, are ultimately necessary to be built.  Therefore, it is being seen as expedient to ensure that such countries do not develop their abundant natural resources for large-scale power generation. Yet, such restrictive, deadly, economic ‘development’ policies, are very contrary to the objective of reducing population growth.

In extremely poor countries, social safety nets for catering to the needs of the sick, the elderly, the unemployed and the infirm are generally insufficient to sustain life.  It is no secret that in such countries it is that families with large numbers of children are seen as a source, the only viable source, of social security.  It stands to reason that the powers that drive the policies for effective population reduction in the world see it to be necessary to keep those countries in poverty.

On the other hand, increasing the average personal wealth of individual people — far from inducing them to be successful in having large numbers of children that they raise in comfort to become wealthy in turn — serves to make smaller numbers of children the norm rather than the exception.  Large individual wealth appears to be the most effective force in driving down population growth rates.  By any measure of wealth and living standards, be it per-capita gross domestic product, life-expectancy, TFR, birthrate, population growth or whatever one choses, the wealthier the people in a country (and the wealthier a country), the more likely it is that their population is shrinking rather than growing — the faster the wealthier they are.

Population-control measures are deadly symptoms of a war against the poor.  Rather than to eliminate poverty in the world, they exacerbate and prolong it.

(Visited 25 times, 1 visit(s) today)
This entry was posted in Abortion, Economy, Family, Gay issues, Health, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Suicides, The New World Order, Violence by Proxy. Bookmark the permalink.