This thread is inspired by another: view original post
Suppose we were able to cure all disease at this very moment. All of the people who would ordinarily die will now remain alive, resulting in a higher-than-usual population. This effect will only be further compounded by those people who would have died now being capable of having [more] children. However, you may have noticed this problem isn't strictly limited to disease. Any mechanism, tangible or not, which prolongs the life of someone who would otherwise die, will in effect produce a higher-than-normal population.
So, while saving people sounds good on paper, the inevitable result is an increased population and its subsequent effects (eg. overpopulation resulting in famine, crime, etc...).
What is your solution to the problem?
English
#Offtopic
-
Edited by BIG IRON ENERGY: 6/21/2015 12:02:43 AMI really should wear a Stab Vest when I'm here, there's that much edge. all I believe is this; if scientists somehow happen to make a miracle drug that can cure Cancer and other diseases, it would never make it out of the lab, because the government would never let it.. why? population control. supposing the drug does make it out, how much will it cost? it sure as hell ain't gonna be free, even on the NHS. only the wealthiest of people - Bankers, Politicians, celebrities; the "Elite". They will be the only ones who can afford it anyway. the rest of us just have to hope we don't get afflicted, since it would still mean a slow and painful death for us. as for the question of is it [i]right,[/i] I honestly couldn't give a straight answer, it's not something I think about. then again, if my theory ends up being what happens, personal opinion won't matter anyway. TL;DR: who cares, government would never let it happen, at least not for the working class majority.