'reproducytive choices can destablize global economy'

[donsu]

http://www.democracyjournal.org/article.php?ID=6471&PHPSESSID=934f4ae39e5aa771dbb7c627f52c1098

The New Biopolitics
How individual reproductive choices made around the world can destabilize the global economy and threaten our security–and what we can do about it.



-snip-

But, along with electronic commerce, transnational fanaticism, and increasingly fluid borders, there is a missing piece in the current picture of globalization, one that puts the familiar paradoxes in a new light: biopolitics, the politics of human life and reproduction. Around the world, people are taking control of childbearing in new ways, which could produce serious consequences for global politics. In Europe, Russia, Japan, and South Korea, women are having too few children to sustain the current population. A shrinking workforce means too few taxpayers to support the next generation of retirees. The only obvious solution is greatly expanded immigration–which, recall, is already the source of riots, xenophobia, and deep political anxiety. All this threatens a perfect political storm of bankrupt welfare states, struggles over immigration, and crises of national identity. Meanwhile, in India, China, Taiwan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a very different problem is growing. Abortion of female fetuses, along with other causes, has produced a population with roughly 100 million more men than women–men who are a prime constituency ...

-snip-
---------------------------


this site is new to me and you have to reg. to read the rest of the article

I'm not into reg.

anyone have opinions on this site?

wondering if this article is pro hiring the poorest in the world at the least pay

any time men talk about women's reproductive process I stand on point, with one paw held up

[NYC]

1. Log in this way:

Username [e-mail]
Password hdhyysdtzc

Copy & paste. I know it is a difficult name & password.

In the future, go to www.bugmenot.com to look for an existing registration you can use.

http://www.democracyjournal.org/article.php?ID=6471&PHPSESSID=934f4ae39e5aa771dbb7c627f52c1098

See if you can get right in to that link. If not, put in name and password.

[Heidi]

3. bugmenot only has one log-in for that site.

:shrug:

(Edited)

[NYC]

4. Thank you. :)

Why so complicated?

[Heidi]

2. Check your PMs. (nt)

[LongTomH]

5. Here's another point of view on Japan:

From an Indian professor, no less. Professor Prabhu Guptara argues that Japan will be the dominant world power by the 2nd decade of the 21st Century. This is despite Japan's economic problems, it's cultural isolationism, and its graying work force. Actually, it's the latter two problems that are driving what Professor Guptara thinks will be the deciding factor in Japan's ascendance: Japan's investment in and easy acceptance of robotics.

Why the Next Decade Will Be Neither Chinese Nor Indian

Guptara argues that Japan, traditionally a very xenophobic society, will resist the solution that most other societies with graying workforces are going for: importation of large numbers of young, poor, foreign workers. Instead, Japan will invest large amounts of resources to develop robotic technology to replace the retiring older workers. Indeed, Japan is looking to robots to assist older people in their homes.

For various reasons, the Japanese have been very accepting of robots in the workplace, move accepting of robots than imported foreign workers.

In the latter part of the article and in part two, he addresses the problems of a robotic economy: namely, what's left for human beings to do in such a world.

This appears on a website called: The Globalist, which, as you can guess, is very pro-globalization; however, I wouldn't dismiss it simply because it's from a corporatist standpoint. Not would I endorse it wholly; I think Professor Guptara's view of the future is on one extreme end of the futurist spectrum.

It is interesting to speculate how Japan's investment in robotics, China and India's population with an imbalance of males, and the investment of all three countries in technology will affect the future. I might point out that I found the links to these articles on a nanotechnology site. All three Asian powers: Japan, India and China are investing in nanotechnology.

[donsu]

7. how very interesting - Japan has done wonders with robots and

never went near their women's wombs.

[donsu]

6. thank you all for the log on info - I've read the whole thing and

want to say no to the writers proposals.

globalizing reproduction stands the hair on the back of my neck up.

reproduction is personal, none of any govts. business.

if corporations are having trouble getting slave labor it's not any woman's fault.

countries that have reproductive laws have to solve their own problems, leave american women out of it.

I say no to globalizing women's wombs. men will just have to globalize other ways.

[Triana]

8. Agreed donsu - women's bodies/wombs are NOT

a goddamned commodity to be globalized for saving or enhancing economies - local, national, or transnational. What a load of mysogenist crap. This is absolutely the most mysogenist thing I've ever read. Jeeeeesus H. Friggin Keeerist!

This shit is UNbelievable.

[donsu]

9. did you catch the part where the writer spoke of breaking up toddler

fights?

I wanted to scream

[stepnw1f]

12. Agreed... We Are Not Cattle

[eppur_se_muova]

10. Actually, destabilize the elites' grip on power -- not a bad thing. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Sounds to me like a warmed over version of Pat Buchanan's

"We need more white people" rant.

I don't feel like registering to read the rest, but it smells bad so far.

I'm with the last sentence in your OP, 100%.

[applegrove]

13. As if immigration never helped before? Well not for some groups.

But for most.. immigration made us middle class and rich ..as nations go.

[SoCalDem]

14. Reproduction is more than just "having babies"

Those babies will need food, shelter, education, a stable lifestyle.

In societies where Mom & Dad have to work 80 hr workweeks to have a roof over their 700 sq ft abode, and food on the table, they are likely to have few if any children.

In societies that still subsistence-farm, and live in substandard lodging, they are likely to have MANY children, since survival of SOME is the goal...and of course those communities are usually male-dominated and unprotected sex is foreign to them.. In times other than famine, a woman will be pregnant and nursing a baby for most of her reproductive life.. Many children will not survive childhood.

In 'western" societies where women have some control over their reproductive lives, they have learned that quality is way better than quantity.

If governments want a stable population, all they need to do is to prove MONETARILY that producing the "next generation" is important. They can do it by paying wages sufficiently high enough, so that young families can afford the luxury of having their own children raised by their MOTHER, and have it done in the comfort of their own homes. When Dads make enough to support their family, Moms often choose to stay home and nurture their growing children. There will always be a part of the population who choose to work outside the home, and if that's the case, subsidization for GOOD child care should also be available.

It;s about having control over one's own lives.. When people feel out of control and overburdened, they often choose to bring no children into such a place.

Importation of poor people from other places..to do the dirty work, is no solution to a country's low birth rate. It only creates subsequent generations of more poor people with chips on their shoulders over the way they were treated. Poor people recently-imported to richer countries DO have children...many of them often..They do this to secure their own place in the "new place" and to insure that they will have citizen-children whose lives will be better than their own. The plan often goes horribly awry as those children grow up and see the inequities that thei parents have overlooked.

Ther overall solution is for governments to start taking care of the PEOPLE FIRST, and the rest will sort itself out..