When I was little we have 5 billion people on the planet. Now we have almost 7 billion. This is too many. They say every cloud has a silver lining. Am I inhumanely macabre that I greet disasters with a certain satisfaction? I probably am. The pain for those afflicted by these catastrophes is great. If I can de-personalise the issue one must recognise that the reduction in the global populace is to be welcomed. Rather than the pain of bereavement better that we were spared premature death by avoiding unnecessary births.

I have long been a pro-Lifer. I have been overly strident in advocating this. I espoused this cause with a grating moral certainty. I prefer not to think about the actual mechanics of termination. I have been compelled to reassess my position. I have shown moral courage on this head. However, I now conclude that bravery is normally a great error. Be immoral – one has a much better life! I used to think that women who terminated their foetuses were utterly morally bankrupt. But now I know several of them and they are decent and even amiable people.

It is notable that about 40% of Americans call themselves pro-Life yet 90% of Down’s syndrome foetuses are terminated. Pro-Life people are as likely to conceive Down’s syndrome babies are pro-Choice people, am I wrong? So what happened to that 30% gap between the 40% who say no abortion and the 10% who practise no abortion when it comes to Down’s babies? Maybe they turn into pro-Choice in the light of their experience. Moreover, some of those who give birth to Down’s babies are pro-Choice. Pro-choice people may say ”I would never terminate a a foetus myself but I would allow that choice to others.” Some pro-Choice people would terminate for other reasons but not for this reason. To be fair there are varying levels of being pro-Choice. Bush in his 2004 platform said he would allow termination in cases of rape of incest. Of course he did not change the law on abortion or even seek to but for a Republican presidential candidate it is almost essential to sound pro-Life.

Population growth is a great menace to the plant. Ironically it is those who can least afford children have most and those who can most afford them have the least. The rich West tends to have a birth rate of below 2.1. We measure the rate according to the number of woman on the sensible basis that one cannot be certain of who the father is without a paternity test. 2.2 babies per woman is needed to maintain a stable population. It is not 2.0 because one assumes that some of those babies will not become adults who have children themselves. Some elect to be childless and others are infertile.It is in in poor lands where the birth rate per woman is much higher. Even within poor countries the rich tend to have fewer children and the poor have more. Hindu men often want a son to light their funeral pyre so they keep going, having children, to get a son even if they already have a dozen daughters.

We must encourage and even pressure people to limit family size. We must overcome this absurd sexism. In many Asiatic lands there is a distinct preference for boys. In India and China ultrasounds are used to determine the sex of the foetus. Females foetuses are quite commonly terminated. The feminist advocacy of abortion has boomeranged tragically. This is the ultimate sex discrimination – termination. There is a population imbalance with about 52% of the babies born in these countries being boys. Female infants are neglected, exposed or even outright murdered. I must say that such cases of killing a baby girl are rare but not as rare as they should be. The poor can seldom afford ultrasounds. In India testing for the sex of the child with a view to terminating the child according to gender is illegal. But it happens a lot.

There will be an awful lot of Chinese and Indian boys who cannot find wives. In a way this will help solve the gender discrimination and population crisis. Men can produce an almost limitless number of children. The status of girls is being raised by their being a minority.

I often think that Bill Gates might stand for the presidency of the US. He could offer free healthcare to every American for the duration of his presidency. He could afford it. He had evinced no interest in a political career. What he could do that would be most beneficial to the plant is to offer say $1 000 to any man under 50 to have a vasectomy. He would pay for the vasectomy, Mr Gates would I mean. $1 000 is not so much in the US but in countries like India this would sway many. The money has 10 times the purchasing power in India. I say under 50 because men are capable of siring children beyond this age but few do as testosterone decreases.

I say it is better to do this to men rather than hysterectomies because vasectomies are quick, cheap and not very invasive. They are also reversible which may make men more willing to go through with them than women are with the equivalent operation. It is important that the $1 000 not be enough to pay for a reversal and leave the man with much left.

Governments could say no promotion in the military and civil service till one has a vasectomy. Get married have a child or two maximum and then have a vasectomy.

The Chinese one child policy has been very bloody but it has controlled the population. Where would we be without it?

India tried a vasectomy campaign in the 1970s with very little success. Sanjay Gandhi, the son of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was behind it. It is said that men were kidnapped and had the operation performed on them against their will.

In the rich west we have declining populations. This is worrisome in terms of pensions but not as bad as a population explosion in the poor lands. Overall the world population is growing frighteningly fast.

When Germany started pensions as we know them under Bismarck the age to retire was 65. This was beyond life expectancy. Most died without receiving a penny. Now in rich lands most draw pensions for a good 15 years and this is only set to grow. There used to be over 10 workers per pensioner. Now we have only 2 per pensioner. It is falling to close to one worker per pensioner. Clearly this is absolutely unsustainable. People used to be crocked at 65. Now they are often fighting fit. We must tackle age discrimination so older workers can get jobs. It is hard for old people as they are unfamiliar with new technology and working practises.

We can solve the pensions crisis by raising the retirement age, encouraging more people to enter the work force earlier, allowing more people to smoke unharassed and by contributing more money to pensions. It is a multi-pronged approach.

We can reduce the population of undesirables by giving out free cigarettes in prison and giving them food that is as likely as possible to lead to heart attacks.

The most responsible thing one can do is not to have children. Obviously not everyone must do so or we will be extinct. There is no danger of that yet!