China demographics thread.

[gadgetcool5]

I said this before - it's literally impossible for a modern society to reach replacement fertility. It's not just a money issue - I am financially comfortable but I will never ever consider more than two kids because kids are absolutely exhausting and take up all your spare time. As a responsible parent, you just need to sink X hours into each kid each week, and there's a minimum value for that X that money can't solve. And there's basically no personal or practical benefit to having more than 2 kids.

It literally is possible because there is a modern society with replacement fertility- Israel. And even if Israel didn't exist, it would still be literally possible because there is no law of physics against it.

Like I said, it's a subjective question of values. According to some people such as yourself, it's "exhausting" with "no benefit". In that case, you'll leave no descendants on earth. According to other people, it's worth it for many reasons that they could give which are valid to them. Those people WILL pass on their genes. So basically the people who do value children as a cultural matter will inherit the earth.

 

[gadgetcool5]

For an East Asian country like China, also keep in mind too that the goal isn't to reach "replacement fertility" - it's just to reach respectable fertility, e.g. similar fertility to non-immigrant natives in countries like the U.S. For example, the fertility rate for U.S. whites is around 1.55. If China would stabilize at that level it would already be miraculous.

 

[drowingfish]

China is going to go the way of taking in immigrants that is a guarantee. I can see absorbing from countries like Vietnam, North Korea, Cambodia and Myanmar etc.
but in the end population itself is not the goal, there needs to be an understanding of why population must be maintained at a certain level. for production you have automation, for consumption you have belt and road. so there are probably ways to progress that are more aligned with socialist ideals.

 

[Serb]

China is going to go the way of taking in immigrants that is a guarantee. I can see absorbing from countries like Vietnam, North Korea, Cambodia and Myanmar etc.
but in the end population itself is not the goal, there needs to be an understanding of why population must be maintained at a certain level. for production you have automation, for consumption you have belt and road. so there are probably ways to progress that are more aligned with socialist ideals.

This kind of brute force migration where unvetted lower-quality migrants force themselves into the country won't happen in China, as in the EU and US. Forget about that.

Instead what will happen is that they will probably have a 10 times more efficient system of vetting the highest quality migrants from around the world than even the US, utilizing their future hyperpower advantage.

So, at that point, there is no reason why an immigrant couldn't be from Brazil, Nigeria, Europe, or whatever, but has to be from some neighboring countries as you said, since everyone can basically buy a plane ticket.

Cultural assimilation is also not a problem, as the highest quality, high IQ migrants are generally not so dogmatic, it's mostly lower level ones that are hard to assimilate.



Edit: China is not an oligarchic-dictated society about artificial money printing and consumption when you need a bunch of low IQs to spend money constantly like fools. But about high-tech production where these people don't contribute at all; it's quality over quantity massively there.

 

[GiantPanda]

China is going to go the way of taking in immigrants that is a guarantee. I can see absorbing from countries like Vietnam, North Korea, Cambodia and Myanmar etc.
but in the end population itself is not the goal, there needs to be an understanding of why population must be maintained at a certain level. for production you have automation, for consumption you have belt and road. so there are probably ways to progress that are more aligned with socialist ideals.

Unlikely. Maybe taking in a few million of the Chinese diaspora as well as talented individuals of all races. Of course, there will be more overseas spouses, especially brides since most of those tend to move to China instead of the other way around. But there won't be any large influx.

There are still 1.4B Chinese. The country is physically only the size of the US and has a lot more mountains and deserts. In 30 years, there will still be around 1.3B even if nothing changes.

The worse case scenario is 700M by 2100. By 2100, the US will no longer be white and probably the same for Western Europe. I'm pretty sure (extremely sure, actually) that the per capita income of China will be far larger than whatever population comes out of the West. So who cares.

I find the handwringing over demographics to be meaningless. It is basically a Western cope designed to "Okay, they are advancing but Hah! They'll die out!"

Look at the streets of Philadelphia, Stockholm and London (Hell, even Dublin!) and then compare them to Guangzhou or Shanghai which are the most mixed Chinese cities. Whom would you place your bets on by 2100?

 

[GiantPanda]

I think on the subject of demographics, I find it hilarious that the West just focus on population "collapse" when it comes to China and suggests immigration as a solution. Or how the US and the West has an "advantage" because of immigration.

But in the West, immigration and the changing of their population culture in front of their fucking eyes is a horrific, gutwrenching event that is dividing practically every Western country from Australia to the US to the UK and onto every major city in Western Europe. You can read the anger and anguish from the same fucking people who are predicting demographic doom for China.

There is practically no Western city over 1M that I can think of today that has a 90% white population. The exceptions for white nations are in Eastern Europe only.

There is no way that these Western cities with their unending expansion of urban blight and rapidly declining local populations would be better than Chinese cities, even with declining populations, in the next 25, 50 or 100 years. And cities are the centers of development for any country.

I would place my bet on China over the West any day when it comes to demographics. Demographic "decline" is FAR better than demographic substitution.

There are 30,000 Africans centered around Guangzhou's Xiaobei neighborhood. There used to be 100,000 a decade ago.

The area was and still is majority Chinese after decades of immigration, both legal and illegal.

China simply isn't conducive to large scale immigration or -- to be perfectly blunt -- degradation of neighborhoods that we see in the West. There will always be enough locals and a strong enough government to stop any of that:

 

[Maikeru]

I think on the subject of demographics, I find it hilarious that the West just focus on population "collapse" when it comes to China and suggests immigration as a solution. Or how the US and the West has an "advantage" because of immigration.

But in the West, immigration and the changing of their population culture in front of their fucking eyes is a horrific, gutwrenching event that is dividing practically every Western country from Australia to the US to the UK and onto every major city in Western Europe. You can read the anger and anguish from the same fucking people who are predicting demographic doom for China.

There is practically no Western city over 1M that I can think of today that has a 90% white population. The exceptions for white nations are in Eastern Europe only.

There is no way that these Western cities with their unending expansion of urban blight and rapidly declining local populations would be better than Chinese cities, even with declining populations, in the next 25, 50 or 100 years. And cities are the centers of development for any country.

I would place my bet on China over the West any day when it comes to demographics. Demographic "decline" is FAR better than demographic substitution.

There are 30,000 Africans centered around Guangzhou's Xiaobei neighborhood. There used to be 100,000 a decade ago.

The area was and still is majority Chinese after decades of immigration, both legal and illegal.

China simply isn't conducive to large scale immigration or -- to be perfectly blunt -- degradation of neighborhoods that we see in the West. There will always be enough locals and a strong enough government to stop any of that:

Many if not most people in Europe now realise that mass, unrestricted 3rd world migration was a colossal error. But the politicians simply don't know what to do about it. The kind of policies that would actually solve the problem haven't been in vogue since 1945.

 

[tokenanalyst]

Many if not most people in Europe now realise that mass, unrestricted 3rd world migration was a colossal error. But the politicians simply don't know what to do about it. The kind of policies that would actually solve the problem haven't been in vogue since 1945.

Immigration tend to change the DNA of the host country, if done in a controllable manner it could be a net benefit because could allow highly qualify people into the country but when is mass migration there is not enough time to the migrants to diffuse in the broader culture of the host country and could definitely go out hand and completely change the DNA of the host country.

Mass migration of Mexicans in the US is not going to make Mexicans more American is going to make the US more like Mexico.

 

[CrazyHorse]

China should just do what east Germany did in the 80s, remove any burden that a kid might bring, free childcare, good schooling, financial assistance, better working hours etc.

 

[AF-1]

I heard some news on unreliable media, saying that last year China lost the most millionaires in the world (emigrated to other countries). I wonder how much in this statement is truth, or fabricated my western MSM?