Overpopulation or Childfree Town Project

Written by: Alan Ditmore on Nov 9, 2007 5:52 PM EST

http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-othercontroversies/68190-political-towns-extreme-places-political-relocation.html

I am writing because I am interested in overpopulation activists in small towns. I am hoping that if overpopulation activists concentrate forces like the Libertarians of the Free Town Project, http://freetownproject.com/ we can build a majority that can replace public school, playground, ballfield, and childcare funding with contraception and abortion funding and end up saving a great deal of money especially since Social Security and Medicare funding are mostly federal and can be imported.

Housing unit size could also be limited to crowd large families but regular zoning is a big problem because it makes it expensive for overpopulation activists to move in and build a majority.

Anyway, what do you think? Can such a majority be built in your hometown. NYC is the only municipality I know of that funds abortions and it is too overcrowded and thus difficult and expensive to move to or build a majority in. And NYC's abortion funding is still only a tiny fraction of their education funding.

http://freetownproject.com/
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/TurningPoints/story?id=3747045&page=1
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2140483&page=1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Exodus
http://christianexodus.org
http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3401106

Three groups likely to be allied in this municipal cause are gays, especially conservative gays like Log Cabin Republicans, retirees, who would be hypocrites because they usually have grown children and grandchildren but these grandchildren often live in different towns and would be unaffected by local education cuts, and Libertarians who are ideologically committed to small government.

Subject: My speech to County Commission

I'm Alan and I came accross a shocking statistic. In America, and by inference in Buncombe County, 2 out of 3 parents are so environmentally callous that they would turn down even subsidized contraception and squeeze out babies anyway; which calls into question the ability of local contraception funding to save the planet from overpopulation.

But in that case there is something else a county can do and that is to stop susidizing parenthood. It is fundamental that the responsibility to fund schools, childcare, playgrounds and ballfields lies exclusively with parents.

So how is it fair that I, as a taxpaying nonparent, should be subsidizing such reproductive activities? There is no ethical construct by which that is fair. So since none of you seem to be funding contraception anyway, I might as well vote for those who would defund parenthood, while contraception and abortion are so cost effective that funds can be raised privately. And of course that would, and does, switch me to the true party of the environment, affordable housing and direct democracy, the Republicans.

The Republicans help the environment by cutting or attempting to cut parental subsidies like playgrounds, childcare, ballfields and public schools, which is effective against overpopulation in a society in which most babies are planned.

Local Republicans oppose zoning which is bad for affordable housing, and Nathan Ramsey alone proposed a direct democratic referndum on zoning, which makes the Republicans the party of direct democracy.
-Alan

To the Editor:
Contrary to most political alliances and strategies, LGBTQ people seem to be making the most progress in the profit driven corporate world led by Log Cabin Republicans and HRC. To see why, one need only look at the economics of LGBTQ communities like Provincetown MA. According to the 2000 census, Provincetown had only 8% children, compared to about 25% for the nation and 31% for the generally politically allied city of Detroit. This means LGBTQ communities are fundamentally different from most other minority communities in a way that is massively under appreciated, totally politically incorrect, and lies at the very heart of economic conservatism.

You are largely nonparents, with the economic interests of nonparents. And despite all the political rhetoric, what the corporations can see is that so far liberal government subsidies have done far more to transfer wealth from nonparents to parents than to move wealth from rich to poor adults; and when nonparents, like me, form communities and more specifically school districts, we are relieved of huge tax burdens and consequently experience economic (and environmental) booms. It may behoove nonparents to better understand and acknowledge this huge and inherently conservative factor and perhaps use it to rethink some political alliances with minority parents versus those with corporations.
Alan

See, I told you the ONLY answer was contraception, abortion and gay rights. So get on task. The main problem is that the US town with the smallest percentage of children is not in Cascadia. It is the gay community of Provincetown MA with 8% children compared to about 25% nationally. Does Cascadia have a gay town like Provincetown? I will be voting Republican because they subsidize parenthood less in the form of schools, childcare, TANF, playgrounds, ballfields and family leave. They also reduce the population more by killing more anti-choice people in the middle east. Also, I am in the southeast and here the Republicans are further from the center and therefore more likely to seceed so that you can be rid of them. They are more for state's rights. Also, public schools teach national unity, which is the real enemy of secession. So stop subsidizing them.
-Alan

Although I do some energy conservation work on a hands on basis, I don't think much of it as a political issue because direct environmentalism distracts attention and then funding from overpopulation and contraception, which is the ONLY way to actually stop global warming. The windmills were for electric generation, but I don't much care. Seven billion people just cannot live sustainably and efforts to do so are counterproductive and diversionary. Though we could limit yachts to 400hp (you lived in FL, those big semi-planers are truly absurd. It's beyond me why the little jet ski's get the complaints.) I'm more interested in defunding parenthood including public education. Did you know that Provincetown MA is only 8% children? San Francisco is 14%, the USA about 25%, Detroit 31.1%, Maywood CA (a hispanic LA suburb) is 37% and Colorado City AZ (polygamist) is 60.4% children. What effect do you think that has on property taxes? especially since old age subsidies are mostly federal. Do you know of any towns with a larger or smaller percentage of children than 8% or 60.4%. If I can find a town outside the Northeast with 8% children, I will move there and pay the property taxes. Though Frisco is both too big and too expensive for my tastes. Expensive may be inevitable because low property taxes would cause speculation. My county is 22.2% children.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/4805000.html
I'm doing a lot of political and demographic research on localities in the west lately so I can figure out where I want to live. I can find very little reference material on comparitive municipal politics. It's badly neglected. There are many more towns to choose from than viable political parties.

A libertarian county has already been chosen, Loving County in the west. See,
http://freetownproject.com/
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2140483&page=1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia
http://christianexodus.org
I oppose public education because I am not a parent and wish to stop subsidizing parenthood. However subsidized contraception is very important and far more cost effective than public education, and better for the environment. Texas secession might tilt the balance enough to make this possible in the rest of the country.
-Alan

Local governments may be doing a bunch of myopic and reactive
environmental stuff, but they are doing almost nothing to reduce
fertility rates and are subsidizing parenthood heavily in the form of
childcare, playgrounds, ballfields and public schools. Do any two or
more members of this group live in the same town? county? state?
Anyone
here in Nevada? AZ? NM? eastern OR? west TX?
-Alan

Limiting housing counts does NOTHING for fertility rates and is a myopic digression from overpopulation. So in that sense I am pro-development. I want enough housing units for everyone ESPEICIALLY domestic migrants who may be moving for political purposes. I have no problem with limiting the SIZE of houses in order to crowd large families, but I oppose any limits on unit counts, unit densities, or building height. An overpopulation town funds contraception and abortion INSTEAD OF playgrounds, ballfields, childcare, or schools. It has NOTHING TO DO with land use policies other than banning ballfields.
-Alan

FRANCE'S HIGH BIRTH RATE PARTLY DUE TO GOVERNMENT INCENTIVE

France Only European Country With Replacement Level Fertility

France's "robust birth rate," which is "bucking the trend" of declining European birth rates, is "could be attributed to government support for people who have children.

Birth rates in European countries recently have reached a historic low, with the largest and most recent fall occurring in Eastern Europe. All European countries recorded birth rates of more than 1.3 children per woman.

overpopulation links:
http://www.population-growth-migration.info/

http://www.vhemt.org/

Among the few benefits of radiation [Aug. 26th, 2007|07:58 pm]
aditm

Iraq: Conflict blamed for increase in number of sterile men

Youssef Obeidi, 32, last week left Karada Hospital’s family planning clinic with news that he will not be able to have children unless he undergoes lengthy treatment to reverse his sterility. Doctors told him that in war conditions, there is a higher chance men can become sterile.

“For three years I have been blaming my wife because she couldn’t get pregnant. But after a long examination in this clinic, a doctor said that she was fine and in perfect condition to become a mother. For this reason, I had to have myself checked,” Obeidi said.

“Initially I refused [to be tested] because in our Arab society it is a disgrace for any man to be sterile. But later my desire to become a father overcame this and I went to the clinic, where I learnt that I couldn’t become a father because the low speed of my sperms cannot fertilize an ovule,” he added.

According to Dr Muhammad Bashier, manager of the family planning clinic in Karada Hospital, Baghdad, the number of sterile men in Iraq has increased dramatically over the past four years as a result of stress, depression and exposure to radiation and possibly chemicals.

“Before 2002, the number of men seeking our services and advice were fewer than four a day, while we had 20 to 30 women every day. But today we have a minimum of 60 patients a day with men representing half this number,” Bashier said.

“It is very hard to tell an Iraqi man that he is sterile. We even had a doctor who was killed less than two years ago by a patient after giving him the news. In our research, we have discovered that most of the men who are completely sterile are from areas where radiation and chemicals from war have been present in higher proportions - especially in the south of the country and in the outskirts of Baghdad,” he added.

In addition, Bashier said some of the indirect effects of war, such as stress and tension, were also contributing to a higher incidence of sterility among men.

“Unfortunately, Iraq has a very deteriorated and old [medical] system and most of the time we cannot help because of a lack of specialised materials and psychologists,” said Bashier.

Source: IRIN reported in Push Journal 20/Aug/07
via IPPF newsletter.
link post comment

City Budget
aditm

To the editor:
I was very disappointed with the eight budget priorities presented by city councillor Newman and the order they were in. Firstly, I noticed that affordable housing was not among them despite the fact that it was top priority when he was elected and prices have risen since then, aggravating the crisis dramatically. Aggravating the problem further was the fact that 2 or 3 of his priorities were for planning spending. Planning budgets worsen affordable housing twice over, first by competing for public funds and then again by hindering construction. It is also notable that these planning priorities remained open ended and therefore potentially limitless since Newman did not include hard figures or preferably budget percentages.
Among Newman's 8 priorities, the only ones I think much of are #6, restrooms, and #1 greenways and sidewalks. I have warmed somewhat to #8, tax relief, for an indirect reason which is as follows. If the city, unlike the county and NYC, is unwilling and claims to be unable to fund contraception or abortions, then private individuals can; and they can do so, either for themselves or through private charities, with the tax dollars that they save. If a government is spending a smaller percentage of it's funds on contraception than the public, including 0%, then cutting taxes increases contraception funding and thus helps save the planet and alleviate housing demand. Unfortunately, the same might be true of fertility treatments and IVF, which would destroy the planet and aggravate housing demand. Though I suppose it's obvious that no housing follows from no planet.

Tags: