I seriously thought it was an onion article when I first glanced at the tweet
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
GlobalTimes mentions something interesting. That it was Tsai who persuaded McCarthy to not visit.
The Chinese Academy of Sciences estimated China has a carrying capacity of 1.7 Billion, while other researchers say it is 2.1 Billion. ()
In fact, China's population would be 1.7 Billion in 2016 () without the One Child Policy, like to exceeding the CAS estimate of China's carrying capacity by 2023 today.
Do you have a citation for sustaining 3 Billion people? Do they live in mud huts or work as full-time farmers? Do they bulldoze major cities to make more room for farmland?
Nobody disagreed? Who doesn't want a balanced ratio of young-old?
It's a myth perpetuated by capitalist ideology to chase every increasing economic growth with an ever increasing population of laborers.
No nation can grow their population forever, and population decline is normal and cyclical through world history. So long as China is not in irreversible population decline, it's fine. The goal is eventually bottom out at 1 billion by 2050, and sustaining a young-old ratio from then onwards, which is comfortably within China's carrying capacity of 1.7 billion, while maintaining high GDP per capita.
Meanwhile, you have India with 1.8 Billion population by 2050, stuck in low-income trap, chasing that economic growth divided by youth labor, but with ever expanding life expectancy, India will eventually need a 4 billion population to take care of their 1.8 billion old people, since we all grow old right?
Lol the replies are 90% negative towards the propaganda. They have 0 public support.
I wouldn’t use a 1999 study to support today’s projections. Chinese yields rice per acre has gone up.
And it still hasn’t reached California’s levels. I don’t expect crop yields to grow indefinitely, but there are lots of efficiencies to be gained. Furthermore, food security doesn’t necessitate autarky. There is nothing wrong with importing
As I understand it, admittedly I did not study agriculture economics, but with access to people who do, the main “bottleneck” isnt land. There is plenty of land. The issue is water, and getting water to places where you want to farm. That’s a problem that can be solved with technology and investment, something China is stellar at.
I just don’t think that China has a population problem. Its generally better to have more people rather than less people. And while I dont think that China is facing a “demographic apocalypse” like most Western pundits, I do think its an area of concern and that the one child policy was not a good solution.
Sure, but I dont attribute India’s problems to its population size. I attribute it to their weak and inefficient government. China had a billion people since like 1980 when it was very poor compared to today. China lifted itself up through hard work and smart reform that harnessed their people’s desire to build a better future. India can do the same.
In my opinion, China shouldn’t be afraid of having a large and stable population, whether its 2 billion or 3 billions. Our planet’s resources are limited, but we’ve barely begun to tap into them. Don’t be a Malthusian. Western “anti-growth” sentiment spearheaded by economic illiterates like Greta Thunberg is one of the most harmful Western ideological exports.
Their hope is India. That's the only ticket out since China already controls supply chains throughout East and Southeast Asia.
Mind you, China controls supply chains in India, too; but India has been happy to ban imports from whatever industry it thinks it has a chance to compete vs. China in.
Tons of people with no resources is indeed a bad recipe, but I think there are ways you can get around that.
China has plenty of space, after all; just needs to be able to get more resources from else where - say, trade.
But besides that, I think exporting excess people (encouraging Chinese companies & people to set up else where) is always an option. More Chinese around the world isn't a bad thing. After all, demographic expansion across the ocean is what got the Europeans where they are today, in control of so much of the world's resources. Why should Chinese be limited to China?
I remember the "normal" austrailian and bloke were anti-iraq war / anti-usa / anti-war (ie blokes threathen my american friends w violence a few times just while using their passport to get into a bar), maybe that is still reality but the right-wing projects otherwise?
The Sydney morning herald has long been a mouthpiece of ASPI types, basically a CIA cutout, fucking John garnaut was a senior China editor during the 2000s where he liked to boast about having foiled Chinese spy attempts whilst in China and recently had to pay out a massive sum in damages for defaming Chinese Australian businessman Chau Chuk Wing
This newspaper also gave a platform to that idiot who tried to claim that China wasn’t a real country, only a concept invented by Europeans.
Kostakidis herself however was a journalist on Australia’s SBS which tends to be Australia multicultural voice so it’s not surprising they’re not going to jump on the Anglo chauvinist project for a new American century
Even former Australian prime minister Keating came out hard against this new Cold War being perpetrated upon the Australia. People