Gandhi said, "We must become the change that we want to see."

I think that the world can always be and should be a better place. So, how would you change the world for the better? What would you do to facilitate this change?

I suppose I would try to change the world so that there is no child labour. In my eyes, that's one of the worst crimes out there. To get this to happen, I would try to buy things from stores that don't use child labour. Maybe I'd volunteer with an organization like Free the Children.

IQ test required to have children.
Execute all convicted murderers and child traffickers. (Trafficking is when they sell kids into prostitution.

what does an IQ test have to do with having children?

Being 'smart' (and I use this loosely since its subjective) doesn't mean you'll be a good parent also.

Unless the goal was to segregate the human race into 'failure' and 'superior' with the 'failures' being sterilized and the 'superiors' allowed to mate.

Which would, of course, be horrible. If that were to happen in my lifetime, I don't know what I would do. Anyways, I'm not entirely sure how it would be enforced. If a woman became pregnant would they abort the baby if she didn't have a high enough IQ? Because that's very, very wrong.

Anyways, I really don't think that this world can become a better place than it is now. I mean, we live in a horrible world, but I feel like it'll only continue in a downward spiral. There will always be good people, but I can't see that meaning all that much when there are so many bad people. Violence and religious terror continue to grow; drugs and alcohol gain new users every day; the gap between upper and lower class widens continually. Good people try and should try to fight it, but they can never win. And that's my pessimistic view for today. lol.

I think it's just that it's late at night, because I'm usually a pretty optimistic person. XD

@ipink: i wouldn't say its getting worst per say. Compared to the past where there was no such thing as internet [without internet, there would be no egyptian revolution i think], running water, medicine, surgery, long life span, women's rights, colored people rights, invitro, very fast travel methods compared to old horse/foot/carriage etc. I'd say life's pretty good.

Sure there's room for improvement, but claiming its getting worst ignores the evidence that life's been getting pretty comfy if we're able to take most of the above for granted in US.

Noo, not abort. Just limit the children they're allowed to have. You know, there's really lazy people who just have large families just to get the government to pay for everything instead of getting jobs. Those kinda people should be sterilized imo.

Should lower crime rates, since poverty is horrible nowadays and stressed angry people just have kids growing up in a hateful environment, being taught hateful things and passing the blame on people that have more like the people that have more took it from them or something. Or it's just jealousy.

Not to mention the people that are lowering the grading curve in many schools because they just don't care about their grades or future and in the process are harming everybody elses' edumication.

It's either getting worse, or the worse is finally coming to light. Can't turn on the television without getting depressed myself.

@iPink: That's an interesting perspective.

@kipani: I think that sometimes there should be a cap on the number of children that you can have. I just think that we have more than enough people on the planet already. We don't need a bunch more, in my opinion.

@all: I suppose that more than anything, we just need to make sure that people are literate in all parts of the world.

@KTC: Well we obviously have better comfort and medicine in such in our world today, but it's at the cost of violence, poverty, drugs, and other things. I really don't think the world has every been as dangerous as it is currently, especially morally dangerous. I honestly think that life would be easier 200 or 300 years ago.

@kipani: you didn't mention anything about the iq tests so i assume you do mean to segregate the human population into sterilized and fertile groups. I think that's a horrible idea since who are you to decide who gets to be fertile or sterile? It's like telling gay couples they can't adopt purely because they're gay. And I don't believe IQ tests would measure how good a parent would be. There are plenty of smart people who just don't make good parents.

also, what are your statistics about the ppl who have large number of kids. It sounds like one of those "the minority paints the majority as evil/bad/lazy/etc."

And what about the numerous people who have many kids but are above the poverty line? For example, some religious groups forbid the usage of contraceptives/condoms and encourage having multiple kids. This has nothing to with gaining government support and everything with keeping to their beliefs.

It would not lower crime rates as it will do nothing to poverty. Poverty is a living standard that's below normal. The people born under poverty conditions will remain in poverty.

As for grading curve: keep in mind that many kids sometimes have better things to worry about than their grades, like staying alive. For example, if you are forced into a bad school, chances are you're going to be more worried about the bully(ies) jumping you for cash than your english quiz.

@yuffie: i don't see how increasing literacy rates would do anything if people don't have enough food or adequate living conditions first. Instead of literacy, I think we should try increasing their living conditions first before tackling literacy.

I stand corrected. I guess I'll change it to instead of the IQ test, whether they can afford the child or not.

I came from a bad place and I managed to get out. Took a lot of time and money, but if I managed, then anyone should be able to. I was from Detroit :/

@kipani: you are an exception rather than a rule. it's a reason why stories still circulate about how people got out of their bad situations and into successful ones: because they are rare.

Also, you mentioned money. Many people simply do not have the money or means to get out of their situation. Again, it has little to do with being lazy and more to do with their bad luck at being born in the wrong place and wrong time. If you're at the bottom of the society, its next to impossible to dig yourself out. Which is why success stories are always inspiring.

As for affording the child: Affording a child doesn't mean you are a good parent either. For example, if you have a job that's practically 24/7 and you're away from the child all of that time, can you really be a good parent? Going by your definition, yeah this person is a suitable candidate. Imo, such a person would need to prove they are capable of being a parent before they can do so ie be able to cut back on the hours and such.

Also, exactly how much should a person earn in order to be allowed to have kids? Note I said person since I don't believe only couples should have kids. Single mothers/dads work just fine.

@ipink: guess that everything we use at least will bring a negative side effect of it. Even if we made something(ie: machines, internet, abortion(i believe doctors have good intention at the start) purely for good deeds, someone might use it into their perspective.
Plus, machines have their own problem with fuel which contaminated air and etc.

Living 200/300 years ago would be easier:
depends on what you're referring to. If you're referring to how easy we could get jobs, i'm with you. But if we're talking about cleaning house tools, looking for fast foods, or communicating each other far away, i think i'd prefer nowadays' tools of technology. But yes, using those tools make us lazy, xD

@KTC: Literacy is important to everyone. When you're literate, even if you don't know your math or sciences or whatever, you can get a job that pays better than one that you may have gotten as someone who's illiterate. Then, you have more money to find a home/shelter. Still though, living conditions being raised are really important.

@shadowshed: I never thought of that. Everything having a good and bad side... I suppose that it is like that. With the internet, you got easy and fast communication, but you also got hackers and cyber bullying and other nasty crimes as well.

@yuffie: that's only assuming the situation you are in has benefits for literacy. For example, if you live in a poor rural area [india, china] than learning how to read and write is a luxury compared to the necessity learning how to survive by meager farming.

It would be more practical to make sure people can live comfortably instead of throwing a book at them and expect them to prosper.

What is the use of being able to read/write if you're starving?

I agree with both Yuffie and KTC on the literacy point.

In one perspective, it has been proven that women (or parents in general) that have studied have less children, and have better means to take care of them.

But like KTC says, you can learn all the books in the library by hard, it won't make your situation any better if you can't go apply for a job because you have to take care of the crops, or the family, or the house or,...

I think what we need is a bit of both:
A basic education for everyone, making sure that every generation gets more and more educated.

In the meanwhile, get the life standards up, so you give people the opportunity to go to school.

You can't change people unless they want to change themselves. Likewise, if people don't want to acquire education like most rural people, you can't really force them too. Similarly, you can't force people to study either. It's entirely a matter of choice. For example, my entire family just wants a comfortable life, They're not aiming for more. My dad once got a lucrative offer to the U.S but he didn't go. Reason, he didn't want to change what was already a comfortable life. Most people are happy and content with just scraping through life. But their are exceptions. These people become famous, the rest just don't try.