Bogans and the demographic-economic paradox

The Cesspool Forum Index
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Post new topic Reply to topic The Cesspool Forum Index -> General Stuff
View posts since last visit

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mazil
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 11:46 am   Post subject: Bogans and the demographic-economic paradox
mazil
Damn Hippie



Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 2708


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 11:46 am   Post subject: Bogans and the demographic-economic paradox
Reply with quote
Thankyou, Damn Interesting: http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=962

mazil wrote:
It's dysgenics! And bogans and the demographic-economic paradox!! Sad Panda Grr, argh.

It would be interesting... if the number of offspring you're allowed to have was limited/scaled according to an IQ test.

I feel somewhat prejudiced/elitist.


Eugenics
The science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurence of desirable heritable characteristics.

Demographic-economic paradox
The demographic-economic paradox is the inverse correlation found between wealth and fertility.

Dysgenics

DI wrote:
It was feared that this lopsided fertility would dilute the quality of the human gene pool, leading to the deterioration of socially valuable traits such as intelligence.

Indeed, this "reversion towards mediocrity" was suspected by some historians to be a major contributor to the fall of the Roman Empire. The gloomy prediction of mankind's decline was dubbed dysgenics, and it was considered to be the antithesis of the eugenics movement...



I'm interested to know what you guys think!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Coach
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:26 pm   Post subject:
Coach




Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 7129


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:26 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
There's a terrible, terrible film based on that premise. I can't remember what it's called. Matt might.

The plot is that a stupid guy gets cryogenically frozen, and emerges a few centuries later and finds himself to be the smartest man on Earth because stupid people have outbred smart people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lion
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:55 pm   Post subject:
Lion




Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 3531
Location: rawr

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:55 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
Idiocracy!

Ow my balls
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
charlie
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 1:30 pm   Post subject:
charlie
NOT WORK SAFE



Joined: 22 Dec 2004
Posts: 2400
Location: vagrant

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 1:30 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
It has occurred to me previously that we probably aren't doing ourselves a great favour with the advances in medicine (and saving all the 'shitty specimens' to breed more 'shitty specimens'.)

but I havent really thought we should stop either.
I guess when one day our population grows to the point where the planet can not support any thing else, or any further growth, we will have to really think about who gets to stay and who goes. (and how)
_________________
Code pink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger ICQ Number
Lion
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 1:39 pm   Post subject:
Lion




Joined: 21 Dec 2004
Posts: 3531
Location: rawr

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 1:39 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
Golgafrincham Ark Fleet Ship B!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
S.Traaken
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 2:43 pm   Post subject:
S.Traaken
Abu el Banat



Joined: 22 Dec 2004
Posts: 1845


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 2:43 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
I've considered before that fertility medicine means that we're allowing people to pass on genes that would have been, if left to 'nature', unable to be passed on - genes that make people unable to reproduce. This seems to be a strange idea from a natural selection/species survival perspective.

Trying to limit who (or how much) people can reproduce seems to have the same problem, but what need does the advanced human race actually have for natural selection?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smee
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:02 pm   Post subject:
Smee
The Sunbus Man



Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 5250
Location: Somewhere on the other side of the universe

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:02 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
That is an interesting article.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger ICQ Number
Coach
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:10 pm   Post subject:
Coach




Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 7129


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:10 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
S.Traaken wrote:
but what need does the advanced human race actually have for natural selection?


I wonder if there's a danger in stagnation. If beings stop evolving, would that leave us open to biological dangers that we haven't considered?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mazil
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:44 pm   Post subject:
mazil
Damn Hippie



Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 2708


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:44 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
deep square leg wrote:
S.Traaken wrote:
but what need does the advanced human race actually have for natural selection?


I wonder if there's a danger in stagnation. If beings stop evolving, would that leave us open to biological dangers that we haven't considered?

We certainly need genetic diversity to avoid being wiped out by viruses and diseases, I think. I dunno if less genetic diversity would occur if there were less natural selection going on though?? :S

I realised that I'm actually prejudiced against people of (perceived) lower intelligence, rather than socio-economic background per se.

I wonder if bogans would think that more intelligent people shouldn't have more children because brainy == nerdy == skinny == not as fit == weaker == less "hardy" and more likely to be killed off.

That said, high(er) intelligence seems to have been a defining human survival characteristic, compared to other mammals.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
S.Traaken
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:48 pm   Post subject:
S.Traaken
Abu el Banat



Joined: 22 Dec 2004
Posts: 1845


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:48 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
deep square leg wrote:
I wonder if there's a danger in stagnation. If beings stop evolving, would that leave us open to biological dangers that we haven't considered?


But we're super clever. 'sif there's biological dangers we haven't considered.

v :monsantoproduct:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smee
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:51 pm   Post subject:
Smee
The Sunbus Man



Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 5250
Location: Somewhere on the other side of the universe

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:51 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
One of the dangers in these things seems to be that often smart people have 'bad' genetic dispositions as well. No idea about the specific situation of Stephen Hawking, but it makes for a good example. If he knew he had the condition and it was passed genetically, should he have had children??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger ICQ Number
S.Traaken
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:10 pm   Post subject:
S.Traaken
Abu el Banat



Joined: 22 Dec 2004
Posts: 1845


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:10 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
The budget tells me that kids born to rich parents are worth less.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S.Traaken
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:11 pm   Post subject:
S.Traaken
Abu el Banat



Joined: 22 Dec 2004
Posts: 1845


Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:11 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
Smee wrote:
One of the dangers in these things seems to be that often smart people have 'bad' genetic dispositions as well. No idea about the specific situation of Stephen Hawking, but it makes for a good example. If he knew he had the condition and it was passed genetically, should he have had children??


Being the great thinker that he is, should he not have had children?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scarlett
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:11 pm   Post subject:
Scarlett




Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 5517
Location: Sterling Cooper

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:11 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
Who says "intelligent" people are better than "less intelligent" people? And how do we assess this?

IMO emotional intelligence is much more important than more traditional forms of intelligence but is almost impossible to quantify properly.

Just because I have a university degree doesn't mean I would be a better parent than my mother who didn't go to uni but was a fantastic parent. In fact, I know I would be far worse.

And people can still be "bogans" and not very academically intelligent but love and care for their children.

(I haven't read the article by the way...just putting in my 2 cents!)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Scarlett
Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:16 pm   Post subject:
Scarlett




Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 5517
Location: Sterling Cooper

Post Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:16 pm   Post subject:
Reply with quote
S.Traaken wrote:
The budget tells me that kids born to rich parents are worth less.

The baby bonus is one of the worst pieces of public policy the country has ever seen...up there with workchoices and the white australia policy.

It should be abolished immediately. Paying people to have children is outrageous and leads to people having kids who don't have the capacity or resources to care for them.

On that note, our world is so incredibly overpopulated anyway and will only get worse, the conservative notions of "one for mum, one for dad and one for the country" need to be shouted down and replaced with reason and rational solutions. Fear and racism play a big factor unfortunately. People should really be paid NOT to have kids!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:

Post new topic Reply to topic The Cesspool Forum Index -> General Stuff

Page 1 of 4
All times using Australia/Hobart timezone
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next



Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Modified by: John 'KRiSPY' Kristensen