bhide1@gumby.WISC.EDU (Cw Bhide) (09/28/86)
Population growth is perhaps India's main problem ,which eats away the
resources and dwarfs the development efforts. While discussing this with my
friends it seemed that the problem can be solved in two ways.
1. through social reforms, persuasion of masses :e.g.as Mahatma Gandhi tried
to combat untouchability.
2. through dictatorship : e.g. similar to China
The first option looks palatable but the necessary leadership is not apparent in the near future.
Is there a way in which the problem can be solved in a democracy? especially
in India where politicians shy away from taking unpopular decisions ?
If this is the case do we deserve a democratic setup ?
Should we try to solve the problem now on a war footing or wait till it
becomes totally unmanageable with population crossing a few billions ?
any comments ...
Shekhar Bhidejsingh@cive.ri.cmu.edu (J S Singh) (09/29/86)
Singapore (a pseudo democracy) has had such good results with their population control, they are now asking their citizens to have more children if they can afford it. To do what Singapore was able to do, the government in India would then have to get involved with people's personal lives even more than it is already, presuming this is do-able given the 700 million population. My contention is that copying Singapore would be a step in the wrong direction. India's population and the rate at which it is growing is not really the problem as it is that the wrong kind of people are reproducing- people who add to the already burgeoning numbers of a group that are proving to be a social burden. The solution is to provide more oppurtunity for the common man. Simply, we need lots of new cities where the population can spread out into. More schools, more businesses, more chances. The idea is that if the extra population is not a burden, then it won't be such a bad thing for the country. Once the standard of living rises significantly, people will automatically start having less kids. So instead of expending all this effort in stopping people from having kids (and running into all sorts of religious problems), quite simply a large increase in standard of living will take care of this problem. But who am I to say? I am an expatriate ( = ex-patriot ?) after all. Sanjiv
raghu@ut-sally.UUCP (Raghu Ramakrishnan) (09/29/86)
>So instead of expending all this effort in stopping people from having >kids (and running into all sorts of religious problems), quite simply >a large increase in standard of living will take care of this problem. >But who am I to say? I am an expatriate ( = ex-patriot ?) after all. > >Sanjiv Sounds good! So good, in fact, that I decided to run down to the ration shop on the corner and buy a coupla more kilos of this'ere "standard of living" thing. They were outa stock. - raghu
bhaskar@fluke.UUCP (K.S. Bhaskar) (10/01/86)
I don't have any quantitative data, but, looking at global demographics
subjectively, it appears as if there is an very strong negative correlation
between birth rates and the availability of TV programming. One can speculate
about the reasons ("Not tonight, dear, let's watch the unspeakable drivel
show..."), but it seems that the way to cut down India's population explosion
rate is to make TV as cheap and widely accessible as possible, and to provide
volumes of mindless programming (i.e. end the state monopoly).
(Let's forumlate a theory that, just as we are inventing ways to control
undesirable insects by interfering with their reproductive cycles, TV has been
invented by an alien intelligence to control ours!)murali@cvl.UUCP (Muralidhara Subbarao) (10/02/86)
Solution to overpopulation is educating the masses; not dictatorship
or preaching abstinence (as M.K. Gandhi did). Unfortunately,
mass education is a slow process.
-murali.