Wednesday, March 17, 2010

mind wandering

... for some reason I was sitting here tonight thinking about the people who say humans should be limited to one offspring in order to control populations getting out of hand (for various reasons - using up resources, pollution amounts, etc etc). Then I was thinking about my parents' generation of people who are hitting retirement age now or within the next few years. And thinking about how life expectancy is so much higher than it was many moons ago....

So, if we suddenly decided as a world to limit our children to one per family, how in heck will those children financially support the aging when they become adults? My mother in law is one of 17 children, my step father in law is one of about 13. My parents came from families of 5 and 6 children. All of them are hitting retirement age, or just entered, or will be soon. If they live another 20 years past 65, which in our families is very common (my gramma just passed away at age 95 for example), and then all the adults of my generation who come from families around 3-4 or more kids hit retirement age - how are my children and anyone that comes from a forced-family of 1 going to pay for that? My gosh can you imagine the taxes? It is just idiotic in my opinion.

There is already worry about when my group hits 65 because a lot of families these days have '2.4 children' and there may not be enough money going into the tax coffers to pay for my pension as it is. What  if everyone from now on only had one child and that was all they were allowed? Are the people who call for this rule out of their minds? It drives me freaking crazy to think about it because I don't understand how they think that will make things better on this planet. Yay no pollution - but the aged are living in poverty, or their descendants are in order to pay for their elders. Whoopie. What a fun life that would be! I suppose some of those who call for this 'rule' will be dead and gone by the time it started affecting people so they don't really give a crap what happens after that, and maybe that explains some of it?

Beats me but it really doesn't make sense. Some parts of the world are hugely over-populated but they are often the under developed countries, the poorest ones, so why should the rest of us be forced to have one child? I can foresee some major problems in countries that have already enacted that rule when they see their aged population suffering from the lack of children. I have read that in China, this rule was enacted (for urban areas) in 1979 as a temporary measure, but it still continues and will to this year for sure. I read that sibling-less couples who marry are now allowed to have 2 children in order to stave off a major population decrease, but still - what could happen in generations to come? Will the experiment have worked, or will it cause them deeper issues in years to come? This article from 2009 states that by 2040, the ratio of working age to retiree could be 2:1. Yikes? What do they plan to do about this? The article also states that an official said in 2008 that the program would go on for at least another decade.... that puts it at 2018 which might help them out with that 2 to 1 ratio a bit, meaning children born in the following years would be around 20 years old by 2040... but will it be enough?

I don't like playing games with people's lives like that. And the same can be said about taxation programs of any sort - the more money we put out now, the more our children and grandchildren are going to have to pay to settle the debt. Why is that so hard for so many people to figure out? I feel like everything I allow to happen right now without at least raising my voice in protest over is putting a price tag on grandchildren of mine that are not even born yet. My oldest child is 12.5 and I worry about him too. What are things going to be like when he is my age? Is he going to feel the brunt of decisions going on in Canada and the World today, yesterday, tomorrow? Yes, he will. Because I am feeling the brunt of decisions that were made when I was a child, my retiring aunts are feeling the brunt of decisions that were made in the 60s when they were teenagers, and so on.... it's scary really.

ETA: An Aging Society Is A Dying Society via Al Fin

7 comments:

  1. Don't worry. Because we were all exposed to first, second and third and fourth hand smoke, we are doomed to die years before our time. All those smoky homes we lived in, cars we drove in, bars we drank in will all get us and the boomers will be slayed en mass by the giant tobacco industries!!!! The children will be saved from having to pay CPP benefits Rejoice!!! Doom is coming anyway for every Canadian, as new perils emerge daily - we are all afraid now and forever !! We are all going to die.

    ReplyDelete
  2. oooo but just think - the few that might actually survive will have issues with their health care - with all the smokers and their families and friends being dead, where is the funding going to come from? My boyfriend likes to say that he supports our healthcare system with his income tax, product and property taxes, and an extra $150 a month direct through half of each pack of his smokes. 7 packs a week, 5 bucks a pack... you do the math and times it by the number of smokers out there (don't forget the 3 and 4 packs a DAY people)... whooiee will there be a surprise in the health care funds if everyone decided to be good citizens and stopped puffin' today!

    ReplyDelete
  3. You betcha - your boyfriend and I are paying for everyone else's Health Care BIG time. If we quit and then got all of our "recommended" check-ups, the government would be in huge dudu.

    I am a senior and have not used any Health Care services whatsoever since 2006, and few before that. I am a smoker, but never get sick enough to have a doctor check my cold. Some screening tests do more harm than good.

    My secret cold or flu remedy:
    tomato soup and juice for congestion;
    lots of rum with lime slices for cough after smoking or in the evening, plus lazing around in bed, watching TV, reading a good book or playing on the Internet. Bingo, back to normal in no time.

    I just love paying for all those 4 ultrasound photos for nervous nelly women, or for cesareans for those who are afraid to give birth or want family photos (pay for it, yourselves, please).

    Once you are referred to a surgeon, you will get surgery - his/her income depends upon it. Protect yourself - avoid being diagnosed and referred to a surgeon!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Don't worry about population control, by 2040 our children will be living in the Muslim Theocracy of Canada and probably won't be allowed to bear any more infidels.

    ReplyDelete
  5. paying for socialist policies with a declining population. bit of a catch 22 eh.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Studies have been done that prove smokers, drinkers, obese folks statistically die earlier before they cost more then the "average" taxpayer. They do indeed place a higher burden initially on the health care system, but when you take into account the increased taxes they pay in their shortened life, the fact that they do not collect geriatric or end of life long term medical care, collect Cpp they are a lesser burden on the government over a life time. It was a very interesting read.

    As for limiting folks to one child? I can not imagine how these watermelon activists can ignore the lessons of China. It initially devastated the female population numbers. Due to cultural biases to wards males and their duties to take care of the elderly, abortions of female fetus was common, the dumping of millions upon millions of females at birth on the door step of orphanages, the dieing rooms. The treatment of males as little emperors. What do they have to show for it now? Millions upon scores of millions of men with no hope of finding a female to make a family with. Females that were raised in callous "live if you can survive the conditions" orphanages that will be raising the next generation, who have no clue how to do anything but survive cruelty and the severest forms of neglect.

    ReplyDelete
  7. L - my bf has only been to the doc once in maybe 10 years. He no longer has a family doc because of that (the rule of thumb around here is that if you don't go to your family doc at least once every 2 years, you will be kicked off their patient list). I very nearly lost mine in February because I had not been to him for 2 years and 2 weeks. I called to make an appt because I knew my blood pressure was dangerously high again plus I wanted to ask for a referral for getting my tubes tied. His desk nurse told me 'oh you are lucky! We have been purging the system for patients who have not come in 2 years and somehow we missed you'. I was like WHAT??? They were going to cut me from the list, making me NOT have a family doc just because I have not been sick enough to see him in 2 years. Well I'm sorry - I'll make sure to remember to come up with some mundane reason to pop in next time. It would be different if they would phone the patients and ask if they found someone else or want to stay on his list. But no, they just axe you with no notice. Isn't that lovely? Pardon me for being healthy and not going in for my yearly physical (since they now say 3-5 years for it! DUH!). I had a physical performed by my ob-gyn in May 2008 so I wasn't due to see my family doc for that til at least 2011.

    Anyway my youngest child has not seen his pediatrition since he was 6 months old (he just turned 2) because the only time I wanted to take him to a doc, I went to a walkin near my house instead. So my youngest almost 'lost' his doc as well. It's ridiculous really. Treated like crap because you are not sick and don't go to the doc?? I thought I was doing a good thing by not using up $$ in the system. I used up enough when my son was born because it was an emergency csection at 33 weeks, 6 days in hospital for me and 15 in NICU for baby @ minimum of $1500/day. Yikes! I used my lions share that time and we have been blessed with being pretty darn healthy ever since (despite that I am a smoker too).

    My mom is overweight, over 300lbs for the past 20 or so years, and she rarely uses medical stuff too. She has never been in hospital overnight (apart from childbirth), has never had an MRI, had one CT scan for a lump, no emergencies... and she will be 65 in a few months. When the time comes for her to need these services, I want them to be there! She paid alberta health care for all the years we had to pay, she paid taxes when she worked, and when my dad died the govt took HALF his pension before letting her have the rest, so they have taken more than enough taxes from her. But just watch her be knocked down a few rungs on the ladder when she needs something just because she is a 'senior'. I will explode, I swear.

    And mixed in all of that is the knowledge that every program people rely on from transportation (roads etc) to health care to childrens services to welfare can only work if there are enough people contributing to it. The fewer the people and businesses succeeding in the workforce, the less money available to the system. Catch-22 is right!

    ReplyDelete

*Disclaimer

These are my views and opinions. If you don't agree or think I am sadly misguided, that is your view. Feel free to share your thoughts but I also reserve my right to moderate content (IE foul language, excessive flaming, etc).

Financial Center Live Stock Ticker