[KneefeZes]

The first question I have in where would you have these sterilisation rules?

Anyplace where the result wouldn`t be zero people within 50 years. Obviously, I would not expect Indonesia to offer it to an outlying isolated island with a population of only 200 people -- if that island`s recourses are self supporting. Jakarta, however, would be a different story.

Not in Japan, as it suffering from a low birthrate and has a negative population growth. Japan is a fine target for the policies. Like I said before, the goal is to roll back population. That would require a negative birthrate for some time. I think the prewar population of Japan was about 65,000,000 people. Now it is approx 124,000,000. The prewar number seems like a reasonable target and the only way to get there is to keep a negative rate. Stopping at 65,000,000 however, is arbitrary. Even lower is fine -- perhaps to 50,000,000 or so.

Not within Europe as many European countries are also suffering negative growth or are just above positive growth. Europe, too, would be a good target. Negative growth rate is preferred to roll back the population. In fact, only with a negative growth rate can the population be reduced (barring war).

In the US? I doubt it very much. Americans like their freedoms and this would be seen as aginst their rights, no matter how many times you say voluntary. That is the point of bringing controversial issues like this up for debate and discussion -- to convince people to move into a new direction. Admittedly, it is hard. But over time a debate can cause a need for change to be accepted. As for freedoms, many Americans really fought against the freedom to drive without a seatbelt -- but eventually the facts of them saving lives allowed for politicians to legislate the use of them.

In reality, freedoms are bargained away in bits and pieces for the good of society as society evolves. Our world population has "evolved" to such an extent that now it is time to begin the debate on how we are going to bring it back to a level that allows for a large slice of recources for all of us.

Second question: If you enforce sterlisation on criminals I suggested that only sexual crimes/predators would be forced to be sterilized. Other criminals would not be forced to so but only given the choice to voluntarily opt for the procedure as a means of shaving some times off their sentences.

what is to stop you from saying the same for mentally handicapped? The ability to consent with the full faculties of reasoning. If a person is deemed to not have this ability, then they should not even be permitted to have the operation even if it appears to be that they are volunteering for it.

Thirdly: What about limiting poeple to one or two children per family? We have seen how this turned out in China. I have not suggested negative coercion (though perhaps some mix of it could be effective).