Skip to main content
Worldbuilding

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

7
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the response. Your idea of "one death, one birth" and "child licenses" is interesting. How do you think a fair way of judging who gets the licenses would be? Simple randomisation? In regards to the Judicial branch and following the rules being meaningful, surely the possibility of exile from the city and your family would be reason enough? $\endgroup$
    – Frayt
    Commented Dec 6, 2014 at 17:08
  • $\begingroup$ Lottery would work well enough. Do a lottery for childless couple, or if none for couples with one child, or if none for couples with two children, or if none for couples with three children, and so on. You might replace "the couples" with "women who want children". Also if the population target is low you might want to "overbook" to account for delays and failures to have children to avoid having dips in the population. And the people who make the decisions about exiles? Somebody needs to determine they exiled the right people for the right reasons. $\endgroup$
    – Ville Niemi
    Commented Dec 6, 2014 at 17:31
  • $\begingroup$ @PeterMasiar No idea how this relates to my answer, did you add the comment at the wrong place? And the question has an entire section about education, anyway. So presumably the new generations would be taught the skills they need. $\endgroup$
    – Ville Niemi
    Commented Dec 6, 2014 at 21:07
  • $\begingroup$ You are right, I should have commented this on main question. Let's move it there. $\endgroup$
    – Peter M. - stands for Monica
    Commented Dec 6, 2014 at 21:21
  • $\begingroup$ @Frayt: if you have no separation of executive from judiciary, there's a big scope for corruption there. We still haven't separated legislative and executive function in the UK, but we did away with "The King's Justice" quite some time ago. The problem is the (anticipated) inability of the executive to objectively assess their preferred actions against the law. Therefore they have independent assessors to do that for them (aka the judiciary). Ofc the practical independence of real judiciaries is sometimes questionable, but it's the ideal. A society survives despite some corruption. $\endgroup$
    – Steve Jessop
    Commented Dec 6, 2014 at 22:19