Great Wise Ruler

Which is the greater ruler:
The one who rules over a hundred, or the one who rules over a thousand?

If it is the second one, then it follows that any leader or a group that seeks to reduce or restrict their assigned populations, by any means, admit to their failure as effective public agents by that very act. They are, ipso facto, self-admitting that they are not "great" enough for the task. they declare their incompetence for their responsibility.

Leaders and public agencies are empowered to serve populations. They are expected to do what is in the best interests of the people they serve. It should go without saying that it's not in the people's best interest to kill them. Nor is it in the people's best interests to limit the future of the domain under rule by killing off the nation's children.

If a leader or agency is competent, that leader or agency can effectively serve ever larger groups. It is a weak or incompetent leader or group that will seek to reduce their span of control. It is a de facto declaration of their inability, incapacity or unwillingness to perform the required functions on behalf of the assigned population.

They are either lazy, incompetent, or they just can't take the heat. But, instead of leaving the kitchen, they prefer to kill off customers. In a just society, incompetents are fired and replaced by the competent.

"...The only fix is if all countries drastically reduce their populations, ..."
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-367769

“a weak and morally reprehensible deal which will spell disaster for millions of the world’s poorest people.”
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=4973

"Nihilistic thought, with its rejection of any objective truth and values causes serious damage when applied to economics"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/dec/09121813.html