China demographics thread.
- Thread starter gadgetcool5
- Start date
But but but- Western media told me that Tibetans are being exterminated by Han Chinese!
More seriously, the bias of the article - cheering the Tibetan "fight for freedom" etc. - aside, it is a sober reminder that, even internally within a country, demographics is destiny.
Minorities within China, like minorities within the US, will become more powerful and influential relative to Han as their numbers increase. It is up to the Chinese government to ensure that they feel more Chinese and don't become influenced by Western separatist propaganda, because the latter could become a serious threat once demographics swing enough in their direction.
A lot of people unironically think China will somehow lose half it's population by 2030/2040. Fully grown adults btw.
It’s the trend.
Wow, that answers the "China's fertility rate is too low for its current level of economic development" crowd. Fertility rates reallly are crashing everwhere.
Nigeria had better demographics than Japan decades upon decades upon decades.
The same tale with Africa and India over East Asia.
The poorest nations had always had the highest population growth and this had always been an issue tied with underdevelopment. Nations spending to feed and clothe the excess mouths and bodies had not enough resources left to educate and employ those same bodies.
It was the main reason why China went with the one child policy.
This understanding flipped in the 2000s and somehow higher birthrates is now a great sign for future growth. I think it is a Western narrative to force feed us with another China Coming Collapse talking point.
All countries that are developing quickly have drops in birthrates. The ones that do not develop as fast will always have the higher TFR. This has not changed today.
Faster developing leads to better life style and delayed births as both men and women enter workforce and careers which lead to higher productivity in a population.
So today, an expanding population in a future of AI and automation is not an absolute positive -- no more than the high TFR of Nigeria or India birthing millions into poverty in the 1960s and '70s was a positive over a Japan or South Korea who were experiencing a heavy fall in birthrate as they industrialized.
Last edited:
I understand, however policy responses do matter. And making policy choices do suggest what kind of fertility policy is being chosen.
As a requirement for doing the same exact stuff yes.
However, to run a modern economy, the demand for labour has actually gone up, despite massive automation and mechanization.
And this will continue to be the case. Doing exactly what we do right now, would require fewer humans, however to do much more -- that which will be demanded by a modern economy in future -- would require more humans if history is a trend.
Japanese economy and tech was extremely innovative after WW2. Japan was conquering one market after other from 1960 onwards to 1980s. Introduction of walkman was as big an event as the introduction of smartphones/iPhone back in the day.
Agreed. Labour laws should be strictly enforced in China.
Demographic trends are much more stable, and the trend points to further decline in fertility and further hastening of the demographic problems.
Indian nominal GDP per capita as a fraction of China's nominal GDP per capita has actually been increasing. Earlier China's nominal GDP per capita was 6 times that of India, now it's closer to 5 times, and the gap is reducing further. Don't underestimate people!
And Indian annual births are already more than twice that of China.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
So what is your point? To discuss policies for increasing fertility? That's fine and I've participated. But it seems that your main purpose is to hype up the issue instead.
Your logic extends infinitely but it misses the point. It extends indefinitely in the sense that more is always better and so one can always make a case for panicking for not having enough. It misses the point because there is no qualitifiable means as to how much more is needed to simply be the best in the world. Example: If 10 workers used to do 10 units of work, but with modern technology, now 4 men can do the same, with a population decline to 8 instead of 10, we are getting done 20 now instead of the 10 before. Is that enough or do we need to panic that we don't have 12 workers doing 30? According to your logic, it's always the latter.
They were a monkey tumbling in Buddha's hand. They cannot exit America's control; ultimately they found out that there is no point in anything they struggle to do because they can only go as far as America allows its conquered vassel to go.
That's not an answer to the original statement, "Until there's 1 person left and s/he dies, right? LOL Look at Niger's fertility rate of 7; that means eventually, the whole world will be the vast majority them, right? Why would you be so stupid as to extend trends indefinitely? Fear-mongering or lack of education?" Or does this mean you think it will extend as far as the parody goes?
China grows its economy and technology under the full suppressive power of the West. India instead enjoys tailwinds from Western countries trying to lift up its economy (as a challenger to China's) in the type of low-level manufacturing that China is trying to exit. Despite this, China has graduated the fast and dirty phase that India wants so badly to get into and has entered into advanced tech, an area where China is far superior to an India with basically no competitive tech and the gap is widening. We will see what India's made out of when the West has made its peace with being second fiddle to China but now turns their attention to suppressing India so they don't become third fiddle to India too.
Take your own advice over your fear-mongering.
A large amount of incompetent people is a problem, not a blessing. That's why the One Child Policy was made when China was too poor to properly raise and educate that many people. That's India now.
Nope, no hype from my end. We just seem to have a different view of the urgency that is required for this issue.
My reasoning doesn't go on forever. But fertility rate predictions are quite reliable over the next 5-10 years. By any reasonable estimate, they'll decrease further, and this problem will worsen.
When it comes to population, my point is that as long as there's enough food security and basic education (which China has been good at), having more people is a good thing. If not, then at least maintain the share of the world population that we've always had, at least 25%.
We could spend a lot of time discussing what lies ahead. The further into the future you look, the more assumptions and uncertainties arise. However, when it comes to factors like fertility and population demographics, reasonable estimates can be made. Unless there are significant government interventions and cultural changes, fertility rates are likely to decrease.
I want the government to acknowledge this issue and take action, which is why I'm bringing attention to it.