broadsword
Brigadier
Are you able to back this up?
China demographics thread.
- Thread starter gadgetcool5
- Start date
Are you able to back this up?
To increase TFR:
1. start a national propaganda program, advocating having 2 or 3 children as good, and gently shaming people who stop at 1 child. All of this has to be done very carefully, so it doesn't really alienate the masses. And when I say propaganda, I mean every media outlet, every public personality, every tv show, every movie, sending home a subtle message through storylines, personal stories etc etc. Carefully picked so the "positive" stories are out there much more than negative ones. And something like this has to be kept up for probably 20 or 30 years, before significant results can be observed. And only if other points are there as well:
2. The state must provide either enough money or enough free time (again, through money) to people having children so they can work for 40-ish hours a week, spend maybe an 5 or so hours on commute per week and have the rest of the time to themselves and the children.
3. The state must provide more or less same level of schooling for 90% of the population and provide it at levels where that 90 % of population can afford it for two kids. This of course extends to kindergartens as well.
4. The state must regulate the housing market in such a way that 90% of the population can afford to live (be it rent or own) in a 3 bedroom apartment. Due to commute time limits, it may be more efficient to popularize rent over owning, so the work force is more flexible. Which again requires a deep and long term propaganda effort, as right now, if i am not mistaken, rent is not nearly as popular as owning a place. Part of that is due to financial reasons, of course, but part of it is cultural.
5. As a temporary measure until those 30 or so years are somehow reached, immigration policies must be hugely relaxed. With the goal of eventually attracting at least 1 million working age individuals from abroad, per year, who are of course incentivized to learn the language and embrace the local culture. Basically, low income jobs would not likely work there. Which is why these numbers would be extremely hard to achieve. I guess this whole 5th point is optional, but it would surely be much easier to withstand the pension/health/workforce crush in the mid term if said point is taken care of as well.
The whole program as described above would be hugely expensive. And would take literally decades just to get to a barely positive birth/death rate. More than a balance between births and deaths is not desirable anyway, due to long term sustainment issues.
1. start a national propaganda program, advocating having 2 or 3 children as good, and gently shaming people who stop at 1 child. All of this has to be done very carefully, so it doesn't really alienate the masses. And when I say propaganda, I mean every media outlet, every public personality, every tv show, every movie, sending home a subtle message through storylines, personal stories etc etc. Carefully picked so the "positive" stories are out there much more than negative ones. And something like this has to be kept up for probably 20 or 30 years, before significant results can be observed. And only if other points are there as well:
2. The state must provide either enough money or enough free time (again, through money) to people having children so they can work for 40-ish hours a week, spend maybe an 5 or so hours on commute per week and have the rest of the time to themselves and the children.
3. The state must provide more or less same level of schooling for 90% of the population and provide it at levels where that 90 % of population can afford it for two kids. This of course extends to kindergartens as well.
4. The state must regulate the housing market in such a way that 90% of the population can afford to live (be it rent or own) in a 3 bedroom apartment. Due to commute time limits, it may be more efficient to popularize rent over owning, so the work force is more flexible. Which again requires a deep and long term propaganda effort, as right now, if i am not mistaken, rent is not nearly as popular as owning a place. Part of that is due to financial reasons, of course, but part of it is cultural.
5. As a temporary measure until those 30 or so years are somehow reached, immigration policies must be hugely relaxed. With the goal of eventually attracting at least 1 million working age individuals from abroad, per year, who are of course incentivized to learn the language and embrace the local culture. Basically, low income jobs would not likely work there. Which is why these numbers would be extremely hard to achieve. I guess this whole 5th point is optional, but it would surely be much easier to withstand the pension/health/workforce crush in the mid term if said point is taken care of as well.
The whole program as described above would be hugely expensive. And would take literally decades just to get to a barely positive birth/death rate. More than a balance between births and deaths is not desirable anyway, due to long term sustainment issues.
Only anecdotally. My sample is half a dozen mainlanders that I am lucky to be friends with.
FWIW, I read quite a few similar complaints from mainlanders online, blaming Mao's reforms and the denigration of Confucianism for the dominance of women at home.
broadsword
Brigadier
I have many online murican friends on other forums who blame capitalism for the declining white percentage of the population. And they said it was made worse by the bbc worshipping and cuckoldry.
Literally the whole point of the post was to talk about China’s abilities to do things ‘non-organically’.
Uhhh what? That’s hardly ever been a stereotype so not sure what orifice you’re pulling it out of. Let me put it this way, it’s just about as popular a stereotype as Indians having big dicks.
D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
My point was a fairly simple one. The claims of the US being a multiethnic state being destabilizing for the US achieving power outcomes aren't true. California has been min-maj for a while and it's one of the largest contributors to US power
D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
Being min-maj in the US context (California, Texas, Arizona, etc) is equivalent to multiculturalism with Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, Blacks and Whites. Detroit is ethnically homogeneous and is not multi-ethnic. Also, please stop sipping Republican propaganda. Major US cities are not nightmares or else capital bond issuance by US municipalities would not be going up and formal population within city limits would similarly not be going up
What @Totoro proposed in points 2-4 would be a long-term organic solution. You still haven't told us what exactly you have in mind, besides blind faith?
Just my personal experience.
I have the impression that I clicked a sensitive button and you and @t2contra don't like the idea of women dominating inside the home. Or is my impression wrong?
With gender equality also comes the dissolution of conservative gender roles. It's to be encouraged.
----------------------------
Israel is a place where some of the most conservative religious people live. In developed countries, strongly religious people tend to have larger families than atheists. The orthodox Jews in the US have substantially larger families than non-orthodox Jews. Mormons have substantially larger families than the US average.
Last edited:
broadsword
Brigadier
Eh, that was not the crap you wrote. Check your own post again here: China demographics thread..
It was not your impression, it was your mental masturbation. Troll harder. LOL.
If you had some common sense you would've understood that meant dominating the household.
Anyway, short of coercive measures the CCP will find it very difficult to turn the tide in the short term. Suppressing feminism is not going to cut it. The decline of China's working age population is well underway, and by the looks of it at a steeper rate than what Japan experienced in the late 90s.