Chinese Economics Thread

[solarz]

I must have been misled into thinking otherwise by the pushback I received the last time I posted about Chinese demographics, when a number of posters apparently disagreed with projections saying there will be a decline, citing everything from the recent policy change to immigration and the number of kids people from Guizhou, Shanxi and Anhui want. So I guess the confusion must be pretty widespread, or someone would have just noted that a declining population reflects things going according to plan.

I don't know about that, what I disagreed with was portraying China as "two-tiered".

 

[manqiangrexue]

I must have been misled into thinking otherwise by the pushback I received the last time I posted about Chinese demographics, when a number of posters apparently disagreed with projections saying there will be a decline, citing everything from the recent policy change to immigration and the number of kids people from Guizhou, Shanxi and Anhui want. So I guess the confusion must be pretty widespread, or someone would have just noted that a declining population reflects things going according to plan.

I think in that case, you listed an article that predicted China's population to be between 600 million and 1.6 billion in 100 years and people were pushing back because that sounds like it means nothing at all.

 

[solarz]

I recalled I had had a discussion with sol..., now found it:
Dec 29, 2016


in response:
Dec 29, 2016


him replying:
Dec 29, 2016

not sure how his recent posts on this topic fit

What's your point?

 

[Jura The idiot]

What's your point?

in short:
thought you cheered at a population growth back then (in 2016, quotes are inside 28 minutes ago)
AND
thought you didn't cheer at a population growth Yesterday at 9:14 PM

Considering that most of those families would be from poor rural areas, lifting the limit would just create more poverty.

China's birth rates are not the problem, the problem is the aging boomers and the burden they place on the post-80's. Having more babies now won't help with the problem and would only make it worse. The post-80's will just have to bear it, as this is literally the worst phase of the transition. Compared to what our parents had to go through though, this isn't even that bad.

 

[Klon]

I don't know about that, what I disagreed with was portraying China as "two-tiered".

I don't remember using that phrase or concept in the discussion. Anyway, it doesn't matter.

I think in that case, you listed an article that predicted China's population to be between 600 million and 1.6 billion in 100 years and people were pushing back because that sounds like it means nothing at all.

That is a vast oversimplification of the projections.

Explanation: These charts show estimates and probabilistic projections of the total population for countries or areas, geographical aggregates and World Bank income groups as defined in Definition of Regions. The population projections are based on the probabilistic projections of total fertility and life expectancy at birth, based on estimates of the 2017 Revision of the World Population Prospects. These probabilistic projections of total fertility and life expectancy at birth were carried out with a Bayesian Hierarchical Model. The figures display the probabilistic median, and the 80 and 95 per cent prediction intervals of the probabilistic population projections, as well as the (deterministic) high and low variant (+/- 0.5 child) of the 2017 Revision of the World Population Prospects.

So 600 million to 1.6 billion is the outermost range they thought was worth reporting, and it represents a variation of +/- 0.5 child from the median probabilistic value. It results in a very wide range for every country. They also report "the probabilistic median [1 billion], and the 80 [850 million to 1.2 billion] and 95 [750 million to 1.3 billion] per cent prediction intervals of the probabilistic population projections", which all show a decline. And it's a projection up to 2100, so also for 2030, 2050 or 2070.

And clearly the disagreement wasn't only about those numbers.

 

[solarz]

in short:
thought you cheered at a population growth back then (in 2016, quotes are inside 28 minutes ago)
AND
thought you didn't cheer at a population growth Yesterday at 9:14 PM

"Extra babies" does not mean population growth.

Population growth for China is bad.

Demographic shift to a younger population is good.

 

[Klon]

"Extra babies" does not mean population growth.

Population growth for China is bad.

Demographic shift to a younger population is good.

There can't be a "demographic shift to a younger population" without an increase in the number of young people or a decrease in the number of old people. The latter is not happening, while the former can happen, but is unlikely for various reasons.

 

[solarz]

There can't be a "demographic shift to a younger population" without an increase in the number of young people or a decrease in the number of old people. The latter is not happening, while the former can happen, but is unlikely for various reasons.

I believe you are confusing a few different factors. Population growth, fertility rate, and age demographics are different issues.

China doesn't need a fertility rate boost to have a decrease in the number of old people.

Likewise, a population decline (which is desirable) does not automatically translate into an aging work force and a stagnant economy.

 

[Klon]

I believe you are confusing a few different factors.

I don't think so.

Population growth, fertility rate, and age demographics are different issues.

China doesn't need a fertility rate boost to have a decrease in the number of old people.

The old-age population will keep increasing until 2060 (same link as above).

Likewise, a population decline (which is desirable) does not automatically translate into an aging work force and a stagnant economy.

The working-age population will decline for at least two decades. I never said anything about a stagnant economy.

 

[solarz]

I don't think so.

The old-age population will keep increasing until 2060 (same link as above).

The working-age population will decline for at least two decades. I never said anything about a stagnant economy.

Sorry, I see nothing in your link that supports those two conclusions. China's current demographics has two peaks, one at 45-49 and another at 25-29. By the time the younger peak moves into retirement, the first peak will be long gone.