home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!pacbell.com!network.ucsd.edu!ucsbcsl!ucsbuxa!6500axel
- From: 6500axel@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Axel Boldt)
- Newsgroups: sci.environment
- Subject: A simple solution (was: Save the Planet and the Economy at the Same time!)
- Message-ID: <7314@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu>
- Date: 11 Jan 93 03:21:10 GMT
- Sender: root@ucsbcsl.ucsb.edu
- Reply-To: 6500axel@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu
- Organization: Univ of California, Santa Barbara, Dept of Mathematics
- Lines: 34
-
- Is it more important to reduce consumption in the first world or to
- reduce population growth in the third world?
-
- Don't know.
-
- But here's a measure which would achieve both at the same time:
-
- The Plan
- ========
- All development programs for third world countries are stopped
- immediately. Instead, every industrialized country adopts one or two
- underdevelopped countries (a suitable matching could be worked out by
- the UNO) and promises to pay social security benefits to elderly and
- to construct a working health care system in this third world country.
-
- The Effects
- ===========
- Consumption in the first world will have to be reduced drastically
- since there is less money available and therefore living standards
- will go down.
- In the third world, it's no longer economically smart for a couple to
- have 10 children because they don't need them any more as 'social
- security' and because the children have to be fed (less of them will
- die since health care is available). Women will try to get
- contraceptives because they don't see a point in raising so many
- children any more.
-
- The Problem
- ===========
- You can't convince first world countries that this is a good plan.
-
-
-
- Axel.
-