Why We Need A Smaller U.S. PopulationnAnd How We Can Achieve ItnWe need a smaller population in order to halt thendestruction of our environment, and to create an economynthat will be sustainable over the very long term.nWe are trying to address our steadily worseningnenvironmental problems without coming to grips with theirnroot cause – overpopulation.nIf present imniigration and fertility ratesncontinue, our population, now over 254 million,nwill pass 400 million by the year 2050 ~ andnstill be growing rapidly!nAll efforts to save our environment will ultimately benfutile unless we not only halt U.S. population growth, butnreverse it, so that our population can eventually be stabilizednat a sustainable level – far lower than it is today.nThe Optimum U.S. Population SizenThe central issue is surely this: At what size shouldnwe seek to stabilize U.S. population? Unless we knownin what direction we should be headed, how can wenpossibly devise sensible policies to get us there?nThe size at which our population is eventuallynstabilized is supremely important because of the effectnof sheer numbers on such vitally important national goalsnas a healthy environment, and a sustainable economy.nWe believe these goals can best be achieved with anU.S. population in the range of 125 to 150 million, ornabout its size in the 1940s. This optimum size could benreached in about three to four generations if we do twonthings now that are well within our grasp.nHow To Get Theren1. Reduce annual immigration to about 200,000 sonthat it is in rough balance with emigration (out-migration).nThen, immigration M1I no longer contribute significantly tonour population growth, as it does now.n2. Lower our fertility rate (the average number ofnchildren per woman) from the present 2.1 to aroundn1.5 and maintain it at that level for several decades. Wenbelieve that non-coercive financial incentives wiU be necessarynin order to reach that goal.nIf almost all women had no more than two children,nour fertility rate would drop to around 1.5, because manynwomen remain childless by choice, or choose to havennot more than one child. We promote the ideal of thentwo-child maximum family as the social norm,nbecause that is the key to lowering our fertility.nNPG Proposes These Incentives to MotivatenParents to Have Not More Than Two Childrenn• Eliminate the present Federal income tax exemption forndependent children bom after a specified date.n• Give a Federal income tax credit only to those parentsnwho have not more than two children. Those with threenor more would lose the credit entirely.n• Give a refundable tax credit (cash payment) to low incomenparents who are eligible for the tax credit, to the extentnthat the credit exceeds their tax liability.n• Give a cash bonus for voluntary sterilization to both mennand women under age 35, who have already had at leastnone child.nTwo Vastly Different Paths Lie Before UsnWith the reductions in immigration and fertility wenadvocate, our nation could start now on the path towardna sustainable population of 125 to 150 million.nWithout such a program, we are almost certain toncontinue our mindless, headlong rush toward catastrophicnfxjpulation levels.nIf you agree that we need to work toward a smallernU.S. population, we need your support. NPG is the onlynorganization that calls for a smaller U.S. and worldnpopulation, and for specific, realistic measures tonachieve those goals.nIVe are a nonprofit, national membership organizationnestablished in 1972. Contributions to NPG are taxndeductible to the extent the law allows. To become anmember, and receive our newsletter, plus all our currentnand future publications, pleasesend us iK>ur check todai/.nI • 1nYes, I want to become a member of NPG, and helpnyou work toward a smaller U.S. population. I amnenclosing my check for annual membership dues.nNamen$30nAddressn$50 $100 OthernCitu’ State ZipnMail to: Negative Population Growth, Inc.n210 The Plaza, P.O. Box 1206, Teaneck, NJ 07666nnnMAY 1992/31n