State Adopted Sponsosrship

I am going to make a seemingly immoral proposal.

What parent doesn’t want the best for their kids? What country doesn’t want best for the future?

Well, as it stands, in many parts of Europe we do not have anything approximating replenishment rates, and we are seeing eventual decline in populations. And worse, we’ll see a discrepancy in pension entitlements and new generations available of wanting to work for it.

What I propose is a surgical strike ‘fix’ to several major problems. Let me take this step by step.

* in several third world countries my country (or similar other ‘affluent’ countries) start orphanages. Parents are paid to bring their kids to these orphanages, and if the kids have a good health and no congenital diseases (i.e. we select at the gate) the kids enter fosterage and state adoption and sponsorship. Kids entering the program would be quite young, i.e. babies. These babies are then raised in the language and culture of both countries of origin and new destination. Doing this in the country of origin creates a moral tie between these two countries and it instills a mixed identity between the child and the new destination. This new raising should not be a kind of brainwashing – it should be a kind, caring and nourishing process of raising the kids. Better at any time the kids are free to leave and return to their parents.

* Somewhere between ages 6 and 12 (i.e. grade school) the children decide whether they wish to stay or move. Also the sponsoring country also decides if the new citizen has the qualities they’d want, i.e. no severe birth defects, no psychological issues or trauma, an above average intelligence, etc. The children now receive upon moving a dual citizenship and are welcomed as fully citizens in the new country. There is however a catch.

* They arrive with a debt – not to the country of destination, but to the country of origin. This debt is a small percentage of all wages they make being a de facto donation to the country of origin, up till a certain age. Say age 40 – but that is arbitrary. In essence the origin country receives some kind of renumeration for the
kid leaving and the new citizen pays for the relative benefit of now having a life in a new country.

* The benefits would be quite clear – this would create a web of international interconnectedness and cultural exchange. It would create multilingual ties and strong opportunities for international exchange, schooling and commerce. The rich nations would get new citizens commensurate with relative demands in pension liabilities, and the new citizens would almost certainly obtain a far more secure and affluent life than they would have had in the country of origin – and since the newly arrived would have dual citizenship they’d always be free to leave in case they didn’t like the arrangement over time.

I’d like to ask anyone – would this be implicit slavery? Would it be ‘fascist’? How open to abuse would it be, and can we make this gaming-safe? Is such an idea moral or immoral?

Mail me at

If you have any comments please email me

Check out my Disparity SCOOP.IT, respectively my Oil Versus SSPS SCOOP.IT.