Reducing population vs increasing welfare
The education system in the US and in all other countries is outdated because education, as a deal to consumers, who are students and their parents, is a very bad deal regarding to cost and reward for two main reasons:
http://blog.wenxuecity.com/myblog/47609/201306/19926.html
1, with high tech evolves into industry production and society running structure, much less labors are needed, hence it's doomed that many people can't find jobs (that's why expanding welfare is inevitable). For example, retail stores are using self-check-out, so less people will be hired, even though such jobs don't need many skills. For another, Foxconn, the OEM for iPhone/iPad/iPod etc., is using millions of robots and the number is exponentially rising, it means that millions of bachelor degree holders in China will lose their jobs.
2, online education, taking advantage of internet popularity, is much more efficient. So in the future, getting a degree is much like getting a driver's license or a business license on such as realtor and Registered Investment Advisor, which is virtually free, after passing a series of exams that have universal exam codes regulated by the federal government. As a result, there will be no concept of classmates, which year a student goes to college or graduates, or which university/school he/she graduates from.
All these changes, especially on education and the value of education, might lead people to rethink about the welfare system, life standard and living style of the mankind with scientific technology progressively evolving. It's true that some people will abuse the welfare system, but in general, that's the way ahead of us. Think about it in another way, so many employees don't work hard or they are even counter-productive to their employer's efficiency. Are these people better or worse than those who abuse the welfare system?
Wealth or daily necessities are of distribution problem these days instead of production problem in the past because of the current ongoing third industrialization (technology) revolution. The first revolution of steam engine staring from 1760s became mature and saturated in late 1830s, the second of electricity, radio, internal combustion engine and propeller plane from middle 1880s to early 1910s, and the third of jet plane, nuclear power, satellite and computer-based IT from 1940s up to date.
Wealthy people already planned to reduce global population about two decades ago:
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/from-7-billion-people-to-500-million-people-the-sick-population-control-agenda-of-the-global-elite
It's the opposite way of expanding welfare. And in fact, the modern genetic technologies, such as genetically modified foods, have been employed to targeting at effectively reducing existing population and making people sterilized.
Which solution, reducing population vs increasing welfare, would the mankind choose?
