Will the government take away your chickens?

[rufus]

China implemented their family planning program in 1978. That was the one child only program. Now 34 years later we are beginning to see the result of it. Of course it led to better economic circumstances for most of the population, but it also led to some strange social situations: people that have no brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts or cousins.

When the grandparents and parents are gone, the individual stands alone.

I am not sure that is such a great world to live in.

Rufus

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

China implemented their family planning program in 1978. That was the one child only program. Now 34 years later we are beginning to see the result of it. Of course it led to better economic circumstances for most of the population, but it also led to some strange social situations: people that have no brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts or cousins.

When the grandparents and parents are gone, the individual stands alone.

I am not sure that is such a great world to live in.

Rufus

Family planning? Not quite. First child is free. You are taxed (fined) for every child after that. $10K I think. It means that the population of lower income people are forced to be cut in half ever generation but the population of the wealthy is free to expand unchecked.


Add that to the fact that for the most part only boys are kept, they current are the biggest exporter in the world of female babies for adoption an will soon be the worlds biggest importer of mail order brides.

 

[RHRanch]

China implemented their family planning program in 1978. That was the one child only program. Now 34 years later we are beginning to see the result of it. Of course it led to better economic circumstances for most of the population, but it also led to some strange social situations: people that have no brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts or cousins.

When the grandparents and parents are gone, the individual stands alone.

I am not sure that is such a great world to live in.

Rufus

Another interesting thing is how suicide rates in china are skyrocketing. There is some evidence that the single child policy has played a role. People who cannot live up to family expectations feel enormous pressure as the only child to be perfect and when they cannot meet those goals, they suffer a lot of depression.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4149229.stm

http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/09/09/chinas-suicide-rate-among-the-highest-in-the-world/

 

[hemet dennis]

Your personal story actually reflects the reality of welfare. In fact, most people get off welfare in a few short years. Why? Because for most people subsistance living is no fun and they would rather have the independence and benefits of gainful employment.

Do you think any people should be on welfare forever ? There are some families that are on it for generations. I have no problem helping people but some the more you help the less they do or try. Do you want to support families for 2 or 3 or 4 years ? How about after 2 years they start getting less each year till they get none Or they need to show why. I'm not talking about the disabled I'm talking about the able bodied.

 

[RHRanch]

Do you think any people should be on welfare forever ? There are some families that are on it for generations. I have no problem helping people but some the more you help the less they do or try. Do you want to support families for 2 or 3 or 4 years ? How about after 2 years they start getting less each year till they get none Or they need to show why. I'm not talking about the disabled I'm talking about the able bodied.

Why on earth would I want them on there forever? LOL Just because I am not against providing assistance to those who are needy does not mean that I am some sort of fool that(a) thinks we should pay for welfare forever (b) is unaware that people sometimes cheat the system or (c) am against strict verification of income and need.

 

[hemet dennis]

Why on earth would I want them on there forever? LOL Just because I am not against providing assistance to those who are needy does not mean that I am some sort of fool that(a) thinks we should pay for welfare forever (b) is unaware that people sometimes cheat the system or (c) am against strict verification of income and need.

Didn't say you were. So how long should someone be on it ?

 

[chickened]

We operate from a sustainable yield formula and actually own our timber and get paid for selling it. If our government gave it to us to create short term employment and massive clearcuts then we could sell it cheap.

If Canada can produce cheaper timber, even by the use of subsidies, then they will naturally corner the market. Those are the economic facts of life. That is why the founder of Tesco coined the phrase, 'Pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap!' Sound advice.

 

[chickened]

The ones that use it for it's intended purpose are not the problem, it is the welfare queens and others that abuse it that ruin it and it's image for the legitimate which are the ones people like me rail against... not those who need it. The system is due for another overhaul.

Your personal story actually reflects the reality of welfare. In fact, most people get off welfare in a few short years. Why? Because for most people subsistance living is no fun and they would rather have the independence and benefits of gainful employment.

 

[chickened]

Nevermind.

 

[cupman]

What kind of lumber do you sell anyways, chickened? A sheet of OSB is like 6 bucks. I'm in no way trying to be smug, we all need our people to bring us raw materials. I am sincerely curious what it is exactly that you do.