I guess I'll start this train.

What in your opinion is human kinds biggest problem?
It could be our immediate biggest problem. Or a problem if we don't fix it now... Well you get the point.

Congratulations!
Now that you've thought that through. I challenge you to tender a solution.
And yes there's no shame in not having a solution. Because if you did I'm sure you'd be in a well paid government position.
Just food for thought.

I personally believe that our biggest issue is world hunger.
My solution is a tad far fetched but I think genetically modifying rice is (although not the best long term solution) a viable alternative.
Yes there's is indeed limitations to my solution (hence the far fetched aspect).
But in theory rice is thought to account for 2/3rd of all human consumption (I think that's a tad excessive but if it's on the internet it has to be true right?) and since rice can be stored for long periods of time, provides reasonable amounts of carbohydrates I think it makes sense to modify it in such a way that would allow it to give the consumer increased vitamins and minerals.
I'm sure the project would be costly and probably not even possible but y'know it's just a suggestion.

As for my country's biggest problem I personally believe that's terrorism.

4068316 I believe the world's biggest problem is devolution. Every consecutive generation is more degenerated than the previous one. Smart people make their own carriers and don't reproduce much. Inferior humans are spawning the most children. This trend must stop eventually or we'll all go extinct for stupid reasons (because of stupid people).

My solution would be artificial selecting (since the natural one doesn't apply to humans anymore).

I fear we’re already to late. People don’t even see this as a problem. They even think that fixing it would be wrong.

4068693
Eugenics wow.
Sometimes I wonder if the only reason I disagree with such questionable practices is purely due to how effective it is.

My political views deeply disagree with that. But I can't deny the fact eugenics have succeeded in the past.
Yea I don't know what to think.

You raise an interesting point. I'd like to know:
1. How would you determine who is fit for reproduction? Would you have a criteria?
2. Would you destroy the individuals unfit for your criteria? Or simply prevent them from reproducing?
3. Who would administer the above?
I'm not attacking your idea or methods. I've just never had a good discussion on artificial selection before.

4068847 Yes, eugenics.

1. First, I'd set goals for humanity. Is our goal to go back to the forests and swing on the branches? It can be achieved, but I doubt that is the case. Space exploration, physics and mathematics. Those achievements are what humanity strives for.

The second step is determining how much any genetical factor contributes to those goals. If a person has an IQ of a dog, then I'm sure as hell not going to send him/her on a space mission. The inherit smarts are definitely a criteria.

Then we have things that everyone universally agrees that are good. Is good eyesight better than a bad eyesight? Off course. And that can be achieved. Within 100 years, all people on earth could have good eyesight.

2. Chinese had a good system to prevent reproduction. Sadly, they didn't include artificial selection, but the system itself was a good one and it worked. I'd do something similar.

3. Who would administer it? Doctors, mostly. All the criterias can be accurately and objectively measured. The criterias would be public knowledge and you could always redo them if there was a foul play in suspect. It would be like any other exam out there.

If you want to talk about artificial selection, then I'm more than willing to participate. This is the one subject that I hold more dear than any other. You can ask any question you like and I promise that I will not get offended.