China demographics thread.

[SanWenYu]

Let me ask an honest question: why are people thinking China must have high birth rate? What would be the ideal birth rate for China?

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

It seems like every country will go through a demographic collapse as they become economically stronger without intervention. Guess there needs to be some fundamental change in how the society is structured or new technologies invented to promote fertility.

they used to justify it as 'highly educated women don't want to have kids'.

OK how come American and Russian women in the 60's, who were all literate and at least high school graduates, had kids? In particular, Russian women in the 60's all worked outside the home too yet they had enough births to repopulate the Soviet Union after being victims of a genocidal total war.

the low birth rate problem is SOCIAL.

 

[Coalescence]

Let me ask an honest question: why are people thinking China must have high birth rate? What would be the ideal birth rate for China?

Because population is usually associated with the potential and strength of a country, but as of now China needs a birth rate higher than it currently has to reduce or eliminate the negative effects from the demographic collapse. I think ideally China should ramp up the birth rate as high as possible until the demographics of the population become balanced, then keep the TFR at 2.1 to maintain the population.

I don't think having a really high population is necessarily a good thing, if your country is not capable of sustaining them like India, so as a country gets richer it can afford to have more population.

 

[Coalescence]

they used to justify it as 'highly educated women don't want to have kids'.

OK how come American and Russian women in the 60's, who were all literate and at least high school graduates, had kids? In particular, Russian women in the 60's all worked outside the home too yet they had enough births to repopulate the Soviet Union after being victims of a genocidal total war.

the low birth rate problem is SOCIAL.

Yup, the birth rate problem is a social-economical problem that has a lot of variables that increases and decreases it. For starters the increasing price of real estate might be the biggest factor as to why birth rate is decreasing, this fits under the cost living category. A lot of individuals and couples are more focused on saving up money to buy housing and other necessities before considering starting a family, by the time they saved enough they would have already reached an old age were their fertility and looks have decreased.

This problem will take a while for China to solve and despite what the Western media have said, I don't think demographics is a big problem to China compared to the countries because of the absolute number of population China has. There's still a lot of untapped potential in China's current population, judging by the unemployment rate. Not to mention the trend of manufacturing is increasingly become more automated and AI-assisted reducing the need for more workers and manual labor. So this problem might become neutral or solve itself in the long run.

 

[Totoro]

Let me ask an honest question: why are people thinking China must have high birth rate? What would be the ideal birth rate for China?

Ideal birth rate would be one just slightly below or around population replacement rate.

In other words, it's not about the number of people so much as it is about pace of change. It must be as gradual as possible.

 

[Overbom]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China to see negative population growth before 2025: scholar

Low fertility rate and negative resident population growth have recently been under the spotlight in China as the latest statistics show that 16 of the 34 provincial-level regions in the country have observed negative increase in their permanent population last year.

Experts warn that China must make early preparations for an unavoidable negative population growth and it will only be a matter of time before the trend expands further. Although little impact will be observed in the short term, it will weigh on China's labor force and the entire economy in the long run.

In an article published on WeChat by the China Population Association, Yuan Xin, professor of the School of Economics at Nankai University, said that China's negative population growth is unavoidable. A low fertility rate has been running in China for 30 years, and the inertia of positive population growth is about to be exhausted, Yuan explained, adding that the negative population growth will expand during the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025).

"China will be the second major power in the world with negative population growth after Japan and the largest country with negative population growth. This trend will be an important aspect of the demographic situation China will need to face head-on in its future economic and social development decisions," Yuan said.

Negative population growth will have little impact on China's socioeconomic development in the short term, because the population will slowly decrease in the first few years by a few hundred thousand to a million or so a year, which is a very small percentage of China's 1.4 billion people, He Yafu, an independent demographer, told the Global Times on Tuesday.

However, in the long run, it will have a great impact on China's economy. Such trend, when coupled with an increasingly aging population, will weigh on the labor force and the pressure on pension payments will also be much greater. In addition, a prolonged negative population growth will weaken China's demographic advantages, and eventually drag down the country's economy.

Yuan warned that population issues present themselves with a time lag, and once the problems have erupted, the best time to respond and manage is often missed.

 

[Abominable]

Ideal birth rate would be one just slightly below or around population replacement rate.

In other words, it's not about the number of people so much as it is about pace of change. It must be as gradual as possible.

That wouldn't be ideal at all, in the long term it will still lead to a stagnant or declining population . A lot of the public health/demographics narrative has been poisoned by western thinking because of decades of very low fertility rates. Getting to replacement level would be a massive achievement for them.

In the long term you want a high fertility rate as it leads to an increase in economic output, global power and human advancement in general. If it's too high there will be a temporary economic burden for a generation, but it would be an investment in the future.

I think between 2.5 and 3 would be ideal. Long term concerns about overpopulation are likely to be solved by improvements in technology.

 

[Overbom]

I think between 2.5 and 3 would be ideal. Long term concerns about overpopulation are likely to be solved by improvements in technology

That's crazy. The future isn't going to be the same as the past century. Automation is going to decimate countless jobs.

In fact, ironically enough, China's declining population comes at about the right time as to coincide with the 4th Industrial Recvolution.

The labour demand in 2060 is going to be drastically different than the labour demand in 2020

 

[Abominable]

That's crazy. The future isn't going to be the same as the past century. Automation is going to decimate countless jobs.

In fact, ironically enough, China's declining population comes at about the right time as to coincide with the 4th Industrial Recvolution.

The labour demand in 2060 is going to be drastically different than the labour demand in 2020

People have been saying that about automation for decades, hasn't happened yet. In the 80s Japan was supposed to be fine with low birth rates and zero immigration because robots were going to do all the jobs, look what happened to them.

The idea that people only exist to work is flawed as well. Automation should lead to more births, not less.

 

[Overbom]

People have been saying that about automation for decades, hasn't happened yet. In the 80s Japan was supposed to be fine with low birth rates and zero immigration because robots were going to do all the jobs, look what happened to them.

The idea that people only exist to work is flawed as well. Automation should lead to more births, not less.

Well they were wrong then, did people say that they were in the 4th Industrial Revolution in the 80s? I am not talking about "automation" the buzzword, but automation as part of many technologies that come in together to bring in a new era.

It is widely recognized that as of now, in 2022, we are entering this new era. I give it 15 years and we can safely assume that we have properly entered this new stage. At that stage, labour demand will start declining slowly and then faster until we reach 2050. At that moment, we can only speculate, but personally I think that labour demand will fall off the cliff.

For example, do you really think that the current share of employement today in agriculture will remain the same in 2050?