Well China probably has the largest # of millionaires in the world too, so it really doesn't mean much.
China demographics thread.
- Thread starter gadgetcool5
- Start date
Since it takes a lot longer to get citizenship in most countries than a year, chances are, those metrics either track people who have been in the pipe line for a long time, or people who obtained permanent residency in other countries, rather than citizenship. Fact is, many better off Chinese do the latter as a safety measure, without intent of leaving China, or because they want their kids to go to school there.
China has a low/very low emigration rate. Especially for upper class, which is at about the same rate as UK and Germany.
But since it's the only large population high income country besides US (which is still significantly smaller in both population and economy), it makes sense that Chinese people dominate the rich immigration community, especially in Asia.
It's not like you'll find many million net worth individuals in India or Indonesia.
And why is that? China has fairly good schools last I check.
Well those schools can't be donated (bribed) like Ivy Leagues and other Unis in America.
Apart from that I think it's also normal. Since China is still a developing country overall. The country will keep growing and integrating with the world to a point that most wealthy people won't be thinking of emigrating as much. So I expect it to reduce a bit more this coming decades if everything goes well. Moreover China is quite populous for its landmass(counting mountains and deserts which are uninhabitable. So some people will choose to emigrate as well since they have more access to better space and less competition for resources than in China.
Come on. You mean even Xi Jinping and other Chinese officials bribed Havard to get his daughter to study there? We can give rational reasons without slandering others just because we feel a certain way about other countries.
ffs dude be realistic. you talked like one of those single middle aged women who want to get married but say they will not settle for any one shorter than 6 feet and making less than 6 figures annualy.
what percentage of people world wide fall in to this category of "highest quality, high IQ migrant"? say may be at best the top 1% or probably less. in the year 2100 1% out of say 6 or 7 billion people is 60-70 million. in the year 2100 the total world population will actually be 10 billion however more than 4 billion of them would be Africans that is why I excluded them. after all I'm sure China wouldn't want to be a nation of dozens of millions or even a hundred million Africans.
so out of those 60 million "high quality IQ" people how many would chose to stay in their home countries and how many would chose to go to the west or other neighbouring countries and how many would chose to go to China? especially considering that Chinese language is the most difficult language to learn? at best may be 10 million would go to China? 10 million people would be a drop in the bucket for a nation like China. pretty useless.
if we are talking about attracting scientists like the Einsteins of the world & that's what you mean with "highest quality IQ" then I'm pretty sure China, the US and many other countries already do that with cash incentives.
I don't think the demographic issue in China can be solved with immigration, however if immigration were to be the solution then it cannot be this unrealistic nitpicky kind of immigration. instead the only criteria should be:
"#1 are you from ASEAN (excluding Indonesia) or Nepal or north east India?"
"#2 do you have a criminal record or not?"
"#3 do you speak any of the Chinese languages?"
"#4 can you take care of yourself financialy?"
"#5 are you commited to integrating yourself into Chinese society?"
"if you satisfy all the above criteria then here is your Chinese citizenship"
land without people is useless. because population is what brings life to the land and develop it & build it up. when countries are at roughly the same degree of development population size is what determines a country's strength and place in the world. why else do you think China is much stronger as a nation than say South Korea? that is because China simply has a far much larger population.
if you think in the future automation and exports will mean population size will become meaningless then I guess that means in the future a small country like South Korea can just buy/produce a fkton of robots and then become as capable as China.
_____________________________________________
China is far too big for it's demographic issue to be solved with any kind of immigration. the only solution is for Chinese women to have more babies. there is no other way around it. the government has to make life easier for people if they get married and have kids with incentives and at the same time make life harder for those who refuse to marry and have kids through taxes or other means. just as how China was able to force people to have less kids. they should also force people to have more kids now.
low fertility is not only a China issue. all advanced nations are facing the same issue. as for why it's happening.. well some people say it's because of feminisim, that is the modern woman just wants to work and not have kids.
personaly I don't believe that is entirely true. almost every woman I speek to regardless of financial or education level wants to have kids. you can almost see their maternal instincts in their eyes. they all deep down want to become pregnant. and for the older women.. I have never seen a childless older woman who isn't sad and regretfull. wanting to have kids is in the DNA of women.
I believe these are the reasons why the fertility rate is low:
1-women are programmed in their DNA to seek men who are better than them. however since women are getting richer and richer it is getting more difficult for the average man to impress a successful woman. for some women once they achieve financial independence in life she thinks she is the sh*t. at which point she will refuse to settle for anyone who isn't tall as fk and richer than her but then she fails to secure that top 1%er because that top guy has ten other women chasing after him and is in no hurry to get married because there is no biological clock for men. and by the time she realizes she needs to settle for some one on her level she is already at an age where pregnancy becomes difficult.
2- the requirements for a happy life in the modern world are far greater than for the older generations. people want to have enough money to buy all the electronics they want. and they want to have enough money to travel and see the world etc.. getting a house nowadays is much more difficult than what it used to be. all this forces people to delay marriage or outright drop the idea of marriage and kids because they need more time to build themselves up.
some people say as societies become more prosperous they are less likely to have kids. personaly I think that is only partialy true. I think a better way to say it is when societies have higher aspirations they become less likely to want to have kids because they need more time to achieve their goals and at the end some of those people who abandon the idea of family fail to even achieve the kind of massive financial success that they dreamed of so they get nothing in the end.
after all true prosperity would be.. to be financialy well off and own a house while you are still in your twenties at which point getting married and having kids won't be a financial burden at all and it would just be the cherry on top.
The thing is that China isn't the one pressed to get immigrants - they will be the ones rushing to get into China in the near future instead.
China already has the best human capital in the entire world (as can be gauged from various stats easily of course). Eventually, it will produce more STEM graduates than RoW combined alone if the current trends of more tertiary GER + more STEM participation rate continue up.
China is not the US whose sole survival is dependent on immigrants for everything since their innate human capital is bad. Those are countries with different economic models too.
So, China can actually afford to select only the best ones (if it wants), although I don't get why they wouldn't since they would be 'free' to do so after the West collapses in a few years.
I say that immigration wouldn't solve the demographic problem in China, since China doesn't have a 'demographic problem' that westoids claim in the first place - this is a non-topic.
China has hundreds of millions more people to urbanize, to transform its entire workforce from majority blue-collar (these ones will be the ones to in fact finish building that remaining infrastructure, factories, and housing supply required for full urbanization gradually), non-tertiary educated, to majority white-collar, tertiary educated.
Those are the productivity growth fuel units for the economy and society for the next 20-30 years. After that, they certainly wouldn't rely on some Nepalese or Indian immigrants to increase population to re-start growth again, but on advanced biotechnology (they are not full of religious zealotry like the rest of the world) + the world-leading government efficiency and control most likely.
So, since they don't really have a problem, and this is such a 'small' concern for them, then better to import only the highest quality immigrants, like scientists, since you can never have too many of them.
That's what I meant the entire time. China is set to become hyperpower on its own, and as the West collapses, no reason why it shouldn't become the new top global destination for those Ph.D.-level immigrants from all around the world, from then on as a cherry on top only.
Last edited:
A lot of folks view robotics as a means of replacing the population and hence a potential solution to China's demographic crisis. I see it in a different way - robots could actually help promote population growth and increased birthrates.
See this article:
It is only a matter of time before AI and robots make their way into the physical aspect of daily life, and just like how computers have made it substantially easier for individuals to start their own businesses/ventures, robotics could potentially change the way today's youth see childbearing and raising kids.
==
A few thoughts on China's demographic issue:
It seems that the downturn in China's birthrate is more cultural/structural than policy-driven, which means that it is inherently more difficult to correct. Online commentary point towards China's birthrate-unfriendly economy (including super high childrearing costs) and lack of a social safety net, but also trends in the youth's mindset and values (such as the DINK trend). The cultural shift is also evidenced by the downturn in marriage rates; marriage actually saves money in the long term since two individuals are pooling their assets. So, any sort of correction would need to be long-term and focused on the cultural & economic factors affecting births.
Does anyone know if China has begun giving incentives - financial or otherwise - in order to make childrearing less of a pain?
See this article:
While the article is about robotics being used to directly assist the elderly, the same technology could be applied for ordinary folk who could use a break from day-to-day chores and routines that take up time and energy. Seeing that rearing children is seen as an unattractive or even impossible task in the modern age due to increasing personal responsibilities and tasks, a helping hand from AI or robotics platform could free up people's time - this could make childbearing and childrearing a more attractive thing to undergo.
It is only a matter of time before AI and robots make their way into the physical aspect of daily life, and just like how computers have made it substantially easier for individuals to start their own businesses/ventures, robotics could potentially change the way today's youth see childbearing and raising kids.
==
A few thoughts on China's demographic issue:
It seems that the downturn in China's birthrate is more cultural/structural than policy-driven, which means that it is inherently more difficult to correct. Online commentary point towards China's birthrate-unfriendly economy (including super high childrearing costs) and lack of a social safety net, but also trends in the youth's mindset and values (such as the DINK trend). The cultural shift is also evidenced by the downturn in marriage rates; marriage actually saves money in the long term since two individuals are pooling their assets. So, any sort of correction would need to be long-term and focused on the cultural & economic factors affecting births.
Does anyone know if China has begun giving incentives - financial or otherwise - in order to make childrearing less of a pain?