If you're so low income you can't afford a one-off £20 you have no business owning a dog IMHO.

Or children.

The state will pay for your children, though

Microchips aren't just for finding owners of bad children (like Venables). They are also for finding the owners of good children that are lost (like Maddie), or finding out who left the child to starve in a bag (like that baby left outside the Muslim centre the other day).

The state will pay for your children, though

Yeah, depressingly. For some reason excluding people too poor to raise children with their own money isn't morally acceptable. But people will have children regardless, and it's even worse to let them suffer just because their parents are stupid. Oh well.

What's the solution, though? I mean, how would you stop people who didn't have much money from having kids? And what happens if you are rich and get pregnant, but then loose all your money?

Of course, some people don't have much money and are still excellent parents and raise their kids well.

That's a Brave New World you are describing there, Chris.

That's a Brave New World you are describing there, Chris.

I've come up with a natty flag based on some old Hindu symbology, but reversed. It would symbolise rebirth or something.

What's the solution, though? I mean, how would you stop people who didn't have much money from having kids? And what happens if you are rich and get pregnant, but then loose all your money?

Of course, some people don't have much money and are still excellent parents and raise their kids well.

Reversibly sterilise everyone at birth, and then only undo it when they pass a test and get a parenting licence. Money is not an issue, but parenting ability and willingness to actually, you know, be a good parent will be.

That's a Brave New World you are describing there, Chris.

Plenty of good kids come from bad parents.

The population is certainly too high. But what would be on the good parent test? Lend them a baby for a week?

Also, I wasn't talking about genetics, Craster was.

Why do people think that the population is too high?

Reversibly sterilise everyone at birth, and then only undo it when they pass a test and get a parenting licence. Money is not an issue, but parenting ability and willingness to actually, you know, be a good parent will be.

Middle class degree educated people are the worst offenders with a lot of them either never having children

Who's going to fund the state in your dotage? Or will you ever be able to afford to retire?

I'm 29, married, degree educated and childless, FYI

Wait, what?



Call me crazy, but which bit of the state? I'll still be paying tax on my earnings, even after I've retired. I'll still be paying car tax, VAT, and I'll still have private medical cover. All the businesses I'll still be patronising will still be paying corporation tax on their earnings. A declining population may have declining GDP, but it has declining costs, too.

It's not people getting pregnant that is the problem, more the kind of people getting pregnant. Middle class degree educated people are the worst offenders with a lot of them either never having children or leaving it very late to do so.

"Do you read the Daily Mail?" yes = fail.

Fewer people having kids = a good thing.

Not in the short term.

I'm still confused as to what you think I'm the worst offender of.

Pretend I said something profound please.

I was making a spreadsheet of this, but I ran out of rows...