geesmith wrote:Mathematically unviable indeed. We probably need to start watching our backs. Expect the knock on the door from the Euthanasia Enforcement Team.
I sometimes have dark thoughts these days over the beginning of a 'Logan's Run' paradigm, as resentment creates rifts between the generations.
The school leavers of today and the next decade of successors will I fear translate, the disposition of their atrophy in revenge upon the perceived wealth and ease of my generations possessions and comfort.
I have no children, it was a deliberate act. I didn't feel I wanted to commit to the cost on one hand, whilst increasing the world's consumptive problems on another.
Watch for even more legislative changes as a corollary to one end of the curve rising, as the other diminishes; who's going to be working to pay the pensions of those queuing up to get them? Two and two will be politically expressed as equalling three.
I've always thought we had the equation the wrong way round. The population should have been reduced by incentivising the childless to increase, instead of state sponsored propogation through 'child benefit payments'.
Throughout an academically expansive life I've taken considerable criticism on this subject. I now live to find my conclusions reinforced, manifest everywhere in the sad decline the UK's exponentially inflicted inhabitants have imposed.