I don't disagree with the fact that Americans are wasteful. However, the house that he posted required upper-middle income to afford which made up about 20% of the US population.
China demographics thread.
- Thread starter gadgetcool5
- Start date
There you have it. You said you wouldn't claim it in one sentence but then it's used as the only support for your argument in another. There is no proof there aren't enough resources, none whatsoever. Do you think people will be using oil and gas in 100 years? They won't. Most of these fossil fuels won't be worth a penny a ton by 2100. Plan for the future, not the next decade. Energy won't become the national security issue anymore. It will be who has enough high-IQ brains to work major engineering solutions, possibly on a planetary scale at some point. Until full blown AGI + superhuman levels of automation become guaranteed you're damn right I'm going to worry about population sizes.
Also, this lazily and oft-cited 'argument' (if it can even be called that) that Europe and her descendants only became wealthy by borrowing non-existent money from Africans or Asians living at subsistence-level is a woke liberal meme that is pretty cringe and embarrassing. You could only even argue that borrowing has gotten significant in the last 10-20 years at best, and not mostly from non-Whites either.. Lest we forget the borrowing being done by America comes 70% from it's own citizens, and another almost ~20% from Europeans. So 90% of its borrowing comes from White people. It's within the family so to speak if you are trying to color this picture as a racial one. In Europe, OVER 95% of borrowing is from White-majority countries. Most European colonies were net LOSERS; they lost money each year on them. That's what White men do though I guess, they enjoy colonizing and subjugating others in a race for who can conquer the most territory, even if it comes at a net loss.
The reason the Whites were able to surpass everyone is because they innovated. One year, after another, for 400 years straight. But presumably you think if Africans or Indians didn't exist then Whites couldn't have come up with the printing press or the semiconductor or airplanes. It is to laugh...
Seriously? So your argument is that China should start decreasing her population to benefit the world, even though you may agree she might be able to support such a population? This is the kind of thinking that will lead to the destruction of the country.. you think America or Australia is thinking this way? WTF is this, I didn't know there were woke liberal self-hating Chinese in China who want to sacrifice their country so Anglos can become more prosperous.
PiSigma
"the engineer"
And the people announcing they want a billion people doesn't give two hoots about the plebs. So you will have some billionaires and 950 people that is in bonded servitude. Just look at US now, 50% of Americans don't have $1000 in the bank account.
I think US is over populated already, 200 M is the number they should be aiming for.
If they had 200m people they wouldn't be proportionately more rich. That's not the way it works. US 330m is $68k per capita, US 33m is $680k per capita? No... The great majority of improvement in living standards have little to do with natural resources per capita, and mostly have to do with innovations that improve productivity and unlock efficiency gains. And integrating said innovative technology in an efficient way into communities, and having the human capital from the low-level service end, to the managerial and executive level, to manage said technology.
The reason they have entire cities that are shitholes, and arguably already entire states that are shitholes, is because of the human capital in those neighborhoods, cities, states, not because it is 'overpopulated'. This kind of incompetence is going to get China Holocausted. Anglos are worse than Jihadists, their religion of fReEdOm and dEmOcRaCy at all costs is inevitably going to result in them trying to 'free' China.
You are happy with a future China of 800m going up against a billion Americans and untold billions of others Westerners in this hypothetical pro-natalist West/anti-natalist China future. Don't think it will happen anyway but the fact that this is a future some pro-Chinese want to see nauseating. People won't even be thinking about natural resources by that point. The whole concept of exhausting the Earth's resources will likely be moot in 50 years.
MADNESS
PiSigma
"the engineer"
They are borrowing against their future selves. It just means they can't ever have a break and need to continue to work to feed themselves.
Resource constraints is not a major issue now..... But if you look at the amount of water is needed to support one person in a rich country and a poor country. Then look at the water available on anyw place in the world.. you will see China is very water scarce. Can't support 1.5 B on US living standard.
Water stress per country in 2019 (ratio of withdrawals to supply):
China is in a better position than many countries which are fully developed, and is the only country willing to make major investments and change the Earth beneath her to continue huge improvements in this area.
I think that map simplifies things too much:
1. Not all water is the same. China has some of the most polluted water in the world
2. Distribution of water. Much of northern China has per capita water volume is well below the acute water stress level of 500 cubic meters per capita and requires expensive water diversion projects to keep them running. While they are indeed not as blessed with water as southern China, much of the water stress is of their own making:
Chinese agriculturalists are incredibly wasteful with water. China's water productivity is over 7x less than high income countries and below even the majority of middle income countries (I think rice crops bring the value down because of their immense water usage). Coal for power generation, which predominates in the north, and in China as a whole, is a large generator of water stress. Just addressing these two points would bring about far more improvement than all the water diversion projects combined.
This video explains it quite well I think:
Last edited:
broadsword
Brigadier
That's easily a million dollar house (at least 3500 sq ft above ground, likely with a finished basement, totaling around 5-6000 sqft), sitting on at least 1/2 acre.
Assume you need a 20% down payment, you will still owe a $750k on the property. If the home owner applied during the last 6 month, they are likely looking at a monthly mortgage rate of at least $3500 a month.
In this neighborhood, the barest MSRP of a car you can be seen driving is $50k. So 3 cars, would likely cost you at least $1500 a month in car payments.
So without car insurance, health insurance, food and utilities, you are already looking at an expense of $5000.00/month.
You are going to need both spouse pulling in at least 6 figures to make this home financially viable. So you are easily within the top 3% in term of income to live like this. If you want to live here and have all the accoutrement of of furnishing, private schooling, classes for kids, tasting menu dinners, and vacations, and some safety margin, only the top 1.5% of U.S. household can muster this.
| Data | Top third | Top quarter | Top quintile | Top 15% | Top 10% | Top 5% | Top 3% | Top 1.5% | Top 0.1% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (age 25+) | ||||||||||
| Lower threshold (annual gross income) | $65,000 | $80,000 | $91,202 | $100,000 | $118,200 | $166,200 | $200,000 | $250,000 | $1,600,000 | |
| Exact percentage of households | 34.72% | 25.60% | 20.00% | 17.80% | 10.00% | 5.00% | 2.67% | 1.50% | 0.12% | |
| Lower threshold (annual gross income) | $37,500 | $47,500 | $52,500 | $62,500 | $75,000 | $100,000 | N/A | |||
| Exact percentage of individuals | 33.55% | 24.03% | 19.74% | 14.47% | 10.29% | 5.63% | N/A |
That is a huge long post that's wrong. Here is the actual house:
As you can see the current list price is $637k. Well within the AVERAGE of many American cities.
For instance:
Sure it may be a little above average, but it's nothing special. It's well below the average price in major US cities like New York and Seattle.