Switzerland is to hold a landmark vote on a right-wing party’s proposal to restrict the nation’s population to 10 million, amid divisions over immigration.
The proposal, put forward by the country’s largest political grouping the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), would require the government to act before the population – currently at 9.1 million – rises to the proposed 10 million upper limit.
If the vote, due to be held on June 14, is passed, the government would have to refuse entry to newcomers including asylum seekers and the families of foreign residents once the population reaches 9.5 million.
If the population hits 10 million, the government would be forced to end its free-movement agreement with the European Union (EU), which is Switzerland’s largest trading partner.
Ok, just to speed this along: Any discussion that starts this way will eventually come to the questions:
Who do you want to remove from the populations?
Who do you want to prevent from having children?
If we just open the conversation with this question, we can find out what your real motivation is here.
Dont forget: How do you want to remove these people?
I think the “Swiss dream” will wear off and the population growth will stagnate.
Thank you! That’s exactly what irks me about “overpopulation is the problem”. Their path inevitably leads to genocide. I’ll try anything to stop us from cooking the planet, but not that. It’s morally wrong
Holy misconstrued reading, Batman!
How about I flip your argument like you did to me:
Are you proposing forced rape to impregnate women? That’s what “population decline disaster” people end up wanting.
I’ll believe you this isn’t your intent, but this path will lead to nasty stuff down the line. As soon as we start saying there should be fewer people, that this is the solution, the question becomes “who has to go?”.
Lol, not even close. Also, yikes. Just quit while you’re behind
So when I say that a declining population isn’t a disaster I’m promoting genocide, but when you take the opposite position it’s not forced birth for women?
Stop being a hypocrite. I didn’t claim genocide just like you didn’t claim rape.
None! I didn’t even hint at a forced population reduction.
In the developed world, fewer people are having children and those that do are having smaller families. That means instead of a worker supporting both his parents and children they only need to support their parents. When the parent dies there is now more land and resources so things like real estate gets cheaper. Fewer workers means each worker is more valuable and can demand more pay from the ownership class.
I have no fucking idea how stating this gets construed into meaning genocide.
(supporting doesn’t necessarily mean direct support but through their job that helps everyone in society and taxes that go to schools and healthcare.)
Your response, combined with your original statement of
brings us to:
See question 2: which group of people do you want to tell aren’t allowed to have kids?
A woman’s right to birth control isn’t forcing anyone.
There are many things that are necessary but that doesn’t mean forcing people.
Clever to try and make this about a woman’s right to use birth control (which also implies the corollary of a woman’s right to not use it.), but your assertion is that the population control is necessary.
Controlling things means making people comply when they don’t.
Also, what’s you’re goal here: To have people just decide to choose not to have kids? In your mind what people should choose not to have kids? What happens when people choose to have kids anyway?
Which is, you know, how biology and biological systems work. As long as people exist: they’re gonna fuck. When they fuck, there are gonna be kids.