Living forever

[Die Hard]

DH - How does that make your point? Selfishness would give more incentive to keep their environment clean, not less.

No it wouldn't. It wouldn't be my problem.

[moot]

You would poop where you eat. Ok.  Carbon Credit schemes would just coerce you into conforming.

[Die Hard]

You would poop where you eat. Ok.  Carbon Credit schemes would just coerce you into conforming.

First of all, no I don't poop where I eat. Secondly "carbon credit" schemes have no effect on food consumption what so ever. What does "carbon credit" have to do with anything?

[moot]

It's the same.  Overpopulation would be a problem for a variety of reasons, and there'd be artificial schemes like the carbon credit thing, like China's imposed 1 child (or 2 or whatever) policy, to keep a lid on it. Some government regulation of your lifespan/birth ratio. And again I don't see how overpopulation will happen in the first place.  Not when the standards of living will keep rising and demographics are already peaking. 

[Die Hard]

It will never happen. The only reason it works in China is because the Chinese live under a dictatorship. In a western democracy any government that tries to regulate the right of free people to have children will not survive the next election. Right now the birth rate of western nations are around the 2 per 1000 mark. That's 2 successful births per 1000 women per year. That will increase at an insane rate if the average life span was increased to 350 years. A woman now is fertile for about 30 years out of a life span of 80-ish. At the age of 45 87% of women are infertile. A biologically immortal woman will be fertile (and young) for about 330 years (right up to the point where she is killed in an accident at 350), and once the kids are grown up and have left home, she will probably want more children. A biologically immortal person is in his 20's forever, and with the sexual desires and drive of a 20 year old. The population would increase explosively.

[ink]

When we were created, we were to live forever,  death was a punishment for sin...

I would expound, but I don't wish to be banned, for a discussion about living forever pushes the boundaries on "religious" topics.


 

[Die Hard]

When we were created, we were to live forever,  death was a punishment for sin...

I would expound, but I don't wish to be banned, for a discussion about living forever pushes the boundaries on "religious" topics.

The topic does not push the boundaries of the forum rules unless you turn it into a religious debate ... which you just did.

[moot]

Like I said.. Excessive birth rate = no govt-regulated anti-aging treatment. 
Immortal 20 year old hormones aren't a problem thanks to that extraordinary thing called contraception.

[Die Hard]

Young people want children, especially women. Old people want grandchildren. Everybody wants children ... even GAY people want children. After their children have grown up an immortal woman would want more children, and even more after that, until the end of time (or at least the end of her life).

[moot]

Excessive birth rate = no govt regulated aging treatment.

[Die Hard]

Excessive birth rate = no govt regulated aging treatment.

Government regulation = new government next election = no regulation. Duh! 

[moot]

That's unrealistic.  The stronger force would be people's demand for their right to the 'fountain of youth', and they'll back regulation of sustainable birth rate to allow them that longer lifespan, the same way they back carbon credits and other global warming preventive measures "for the greater good", even without solid proof that it's required and is actually effective. 

Excessive pollution/fuel waste = govt regulation.  Do you expect that the oil shortage and outrage of not being able to buy SUVs can be fixed by just voting in a new govt come next election?

Anyway, this argument's stupid and beside the point.  A cure for aging would trump everything else.  The vast majority of people would back it.  It'll happen.  If people can stand for something flimsy like carbon credits, they can stand for reduced birth rates in exchange for longer life. Quality over quantity.

[ink]

That's unrealistic.  The stronger force would be people's demand for their right to the 'fountain of youth', and they'll back regulation of sustainable birth rate to allow them that longer lifespan, the same way they back carbon credits and other global warming preventive measures "for the greater good", even without solid proof that it's required and is actually effective. 

Excessive pollution/fuel waste = govt regulation.  Do you expect that the oil shortage and outrage of not being able to buy SUVs can be fixed by just voting in a new govt come next election?

Anyway, this argument's stupid and beside the point.  A cure for aging would trump everything else.  The vast majority of people would back it.  It'll happen.  If people can stand for something flimsy like carbon credits, they can stand for reduced birth rates in exchange for longer life. Quality over quantity.

I totally believe they are going to cure "aging"   when they do, they will make every one who wants to benefit from "there" technology,accept a chip under there skin,at first it will be voluntarily, then it will be Mandatory.   

they can give the "chip" to my cold dead body.

[BnZs]

Young people want children, especially women. Old people want grandchildren. Everybody wants children ... even GAY people want children. After their children have grown up an immortal woman would want more children, and even more after that, until the end of time (or at least the end of her life).

Really? Then why are certain well-off populations not even breeding in replacement numbers? It would seem like a lot of people DON'T have children when they have the technology available to avoid it. Even more seem to have one or two and then decide they don't care to repeat the experiment.

I think we tiptoe around this fact because everyone like to say "I love kids" "Children are our future" "My kids are the most fulfilling part of my life" "OF COURSE you were a planned child...". But then when you get down to brass tacks, contraceptive technology available with little or no stigma drastically reduces birthrates, thus many, many people really do *not* love the "normal" course of having children, which for most of history was the *unavoidable* course.

[moot]

Ink - Why the chip?