What's new

China Considers Ending Birth Limits as Soon as This Year

Mista

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jun 9, 2016
Messages
4,567
Reaction score
10
Country
Singapore
Location
Singapore
China is planning to scrap all limits on the number of children a family can have, according to people familiar with the matter, in what would be a historic end to a policy that spurred countless human-rights abuses and left the world’s second-largest economy short of workers.

The State Council, China’s cabinet, has commissioned research on the repercussions of ending the country’s roughly four-decade-old policy and intends to enact the change nationwide, said the people, who asked not to be named while discussing government deliberations. The leadership wants to reduce the pace of aging in China’s population and remove a source of international criticism, one of the people said.

Proposals under discussion would replace the population-control policy with one called “independent fertility,” allowing people to decide how many children to have, the person said. The decision could be made as soon as the fourth quarter, the second person said, adding that the announcement might also be pushed into 2019.

"It’s late for China to remove birth limits even within this year but it’s better than never," said Chen Jian, a former division chief at the National Family Planning Commission, who’s now a vice president of the China Society of Economic Reform. "Scrapping birth limits will have little effect on the tendency of China’s declining births."

The policy change would close the book on one of the largest social experiments in human history, which left the world’s most-populous country with a rapidly aging population and 30 million more men than women. The policies have forced generations of Chinese parents to pay fines, submit to abortions or raise children in the shadows.

Two-Child Policy
The U.S. and other Western nations have criticized the coercive measures required to enforce the birth limits, including steep fines, sterilization and forced abortions. The 2015 shift toward a two-child policy was part of a gradual effort to loosen the birth limits over the years as China’s working-age population began to wane.

An initial feasibility study was submitted to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang in April, according to one of the people familiar with the discussions. That study found there would be “limited” benefits to lifting birth restrictions nationwide. Li requested more research on the social impact of scrapping the policy altogether, the person said.

Neither the State Council Information Office nor the National Health Commission immediately returned faxed requests for comment Monday.

"The policy shift will hardly boost the number of newborns in China," said Huang Wenzheng, a specially-invited senior researcher of Center for China and Globalization, a Beijing-based think tank."China’s number of births will continue to drop dramatically, considering a sharp decrease in the number of fertile women and declining fertility willingness. "

Still, the move underscores growing concern among Chinese policy makers that more dramatic action is needed three years after allowing all families to have two children instead of one. Births fell 3.5 percent to 17.2 million nationwide last year, according to the Bureau of National Statistics, erasing almost half of the increase in births caused by relaxing the policy.

China’s graying society will have broad consequences for the nation and the world, weighing on President Xi Jinping’s effort to develop the economy, driving up pension and healthcare costs, and sending foreign companies further afield for labor. The State Council last year projected that about a quarter of China’s population will be 60 or older by 2030, up from 13 percent in 2010.

“The low birth rate and low number of newborns from the previous two years after the two-child policy sent a strong message to the decision-makers that the young generation has a weak willingness to have more children,” Chen said. “China’s population issues will be a major hurdle for President Xi Jinping’s vision of building a modernized country by 2035.”

In March, China removed the term “family planning” from the name of the newly consolidated National Health Commission -- the first time since 1981 that no agency bears the name. Xi and Li also omitted any reference to the phrase from key policy reports in recent months.

Gender Gap
While China credits birth limits with helping to launch a decades-long economic boom under reformer Deng Xiaoping, they have also exacerbated demographic imbalances, with many parents choosing to abort female fetuses. China has 106 men for every 100 women, compared with 102 globally, according to the CIA World Factbook.

Such moves have done little to increase the fertility rate, with many parents concerned about the costs of raising additional children in a society accustomed to focusing family resources on one. Nonetheless, Chinese policy makers have resisted calls by economists and demographers to relinquish control amid concerns over the impact of a sudden increase in births or older parents angry about missing the chance to expand their families.

Even a short-lived baby boom could prove lucrative for businesses who cater to childrens’ needs in the world’s most populous county. Chinese consumers bought $19.4 billion of infant products between September 2016 and August 2017, an 11 percent increase, according to an annual report released by Nielsen Holdings Plc in November.

— With assistance by Dandan Li, Keith Zhai, Andrew Davis, and Hui Li

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/...ider-ending-birth-limits-as-soon-as-this-year
 
.
Too late since the millenials aren't into having kids any way.
 
. .
Too late since the millenials aren't into having kids any way.

Low birth rate is the greatest long term threat to the Chinese/Confucian civilization, if we take a long view of history (>200 years).

One good thing Xi has done is the demolition of the Family Planning Commission (卫计委). It's an inept organization which has always been overestimating China's current and future birth rate.

According to the Statistics Bureau (统计局), China's TFR (total fertility rate) is only 1.05 in 2015. Yet the FPC believes that the births are severely unreported and changed the figure to 1.6. You believe 1/3 of the births go unregistered?

The FPC also believed that the TFR would bounce back to 2.1 after the implementation of 2-child policy. Even India, which is economically 20 years behind China and with no birth restriction, only has a TFR of 2.3. How is China's TFR possibly going to bounce to 2.1 with a 2-child policy currently?
 
.
Low birth rate is the greatest long term threat to the Chinese/Confucian civilization, if we take a long view of history (>200 years).

One good thing Xi has done is the demolition of the Family Planning Commission (卫计委). It's an inept organization which has always been overestimating China's current and future birth rate.

According to the Statistics Bureau (统计局), China's TFR (total fertility rate) is only 1.05 in 2015. Yet the FPC believes that the births are severely unreported and changed the figure to 1.6. You believe 1/3 of the births go unregistered?

The FPC also believed that the TFR would bounce back to 2.1 after the implementation of 2-child policy. Even India, which is economically 20 years behind China and with no birth restriction, only has a TFR of 2.3. How is China's TFR possibly going to bounce to 2.1 with a 2-child policy currently?
Many departments in China practice system engineering...
 
.
Low birth rate is the greatest long term threat to the Chinese/Confucian civilization, if we take a long view of history (>200 years).

One good thing Xi has done is the demolition of the Family Planning Commission (卫计委). It's an inept organization which has always been overestimating China's current and future birth rate.

According to the Statistics Bureau (统计局), China's TFR (total fertility rate) is only 1.05 in 2015. Yet the FPC believes that the births are severely unreported and changed the figure to 1.6. You believe 1/3 of the births go unregistered?

The FPC also believed that the TFR would bounce back to 2.1 after the implementation of 2-child policy. Even India, which is economically 20 years behind China and with no birth restriction, only has a TFR of 2.3. How is China's TFR possibly going to bounce to 2.1 with a 2-child policy currently?

What they need to do is to give out subsidized incentives to people who have more children.
However, people in China might abuse it if they do such a thing.
 
.
What they need to do is to give out subsidized incentives to people who have more children.
However, people in China might abuse it if they do such a thing.
I think the stick would work better than the carrot here. These incentives have been used previously and they've never (to my knowledge) had the desired effect. This might: No children? No pension.
 
.
I think the stick would work better than the carrot here. These incentives have been used previously and they've never (to my knowledge) had the desired effect. This might: No children? No pension.

What about infertile couples?
 
.
Many departments in China practice system engineering...

Information and statistics should be as accurate as possible and not depending on their political inclination or belief, so that policy makers can make informed decisions on that basis.

What they need to do is to give out subsidized incentives to people who have more children.
However, people in China might abuse it if they do such a thing.

It barely works in other countries. Singapore has so many incentives, and yet the TFR is still 1.2. Lee Kuan Yew even mooted the idea of giving cash bonus of 2 years of the average Singaporean salary, to prove that the TFR would improve only marginally. Why? Because many women aren't even planning to get married. They won't get married and have kids even their with pressures from their parents everyday, much less with cash incentives.

I think the stick would work better than the carrot here. These incentives have been used previously and they've never (to my knowledge) had the desired effect. This might: No children? No pension.

Japan once suggested it but didn't manage to implement due to public outcry.

Earlier this week Kato reportedly told a group of LDP members: “I ask bridal couples to bear and raise more than three children for sure.”

Kato also said he often told young women that if they do not get married and have no offspring, they will end up in a care home run with the taxes of other people’s children.

Kato later retracted his remarks.

In 2003, former prime minister Yoshiro Mori drew fire for suggesting childless women should be denied welfare payments in old age.

Mori said: “Women who have not had a single child get old after their wonderful free life and then ask for public money [in welfare]. That doesn’t make sense at all.”

http://m.scmp.com/news/asia/east-as...p-under-fire-saying-single-women-state-burden

Even though it's politically incorrect, they actually make sense. From a purely economic point of view, raising a child is an altruistic act of providing public goods to the society with their own blood and sweat. You painstakingly raise the child and the child will have to pay more tax than the benefits your family receive in the future, so that the society can support singles in their old age.

China should try reducing pension for singles if they are fertile.
 
.
What about infertile couples?
There are mitigating factors, as with any rule; but there's also a primary thrust, and it's not even unfair: individuals who have no children go through life spared a very substantial set of expenditures. It's not wrong to ask them to use those savings to fund their own retirement instead of using the resources of the state (i.e., other people's children).
Japan once suggested it but didn't manage to implement due to public outcry.
Japan is very different from China, not least in political systems and the capacities for coercion in the respective systems.

I think this whole "demographics" thing is overblown. US fertility has also been falling quite precipitously, so if there's a problem it's a worldwide problem. In a few decades - worst case scenario by century's end - medicine will have advanced to the point where aging itself can be comprehensively addressed (essentially cured) and people will be functionally biologically immortal, mooting all of this.
 
.
It barely works in other countries. Singapore has so many incentives, and yet the TFR is still 1.2. Lee Kuan Yew even mooted the idea of giving cash bonus of 2 years of the average Singaporean salary, to prove that the TFR would improve only marginally. Why? Because many women aren't even planning to get married. They won't get married and have kids even their with pressures from their parents everyday, much less with cash incentives.

So what's the root of all this "I don't want to get married". Is something suddenly far more expensive than it was say 25 years ago...or is it the typical problem with developed countries of children simply getting in the way of people's lifesyles.
 
.
So what's the root of all this "I don't want to get married". Is something suddenly far more expensive than it was say 25 years ago...or is it the typical problem with developed countries of children simply getting in the way of people's lifesyles.

The economical pressure of urban life, the ego-centric and more individualism minded of younger generations, Expensive Lifestyle that will gone when you're married and have Children, Contraception tools that give you the ability to do safe sex with anyone you like without having responsibility to marry and have children with your sex partner, the more and more energy and money that you need to raise Children.
 
.
I think this whole "demographics" thing is overblown. US fertility has also been falling quite precipitously

The US has a TFR of 1.8 and they accept many migrants every year.

Even with a healthy TFR above 2 in the past and with a liberal immigration system, their social security is already starting to face problems.

if there's a problem it's a worldwide problem

Indeed, especially in developed countries.

In a few decades - worst case scenario by century's end - medicine will have advanced to the point where aging itself can be comprehensively addressed (essentially cured) and people will be functionally biologically immortal, mooting all of this.

Do you seriously believe that human beings can cure aging or even death? We can only postpone the problem.
 
.
The US has a TFR of 1.8 and they accept many migrants every year.

Even with a healthy TFR above 2 in the past and with a liberal immigration system, their social security is already starting to face problems.

Indeed, especially in developed countries.

Do you seriously believe that human beings can cure aging or even death?

The bold one : Human Beings can raise the life expectancy, but won't be able to deny death. Because when you reach the age of 30, your growth will stop, and your body will start aging. That's why many long term illness like Diabetic type 2, etc start when you reach the age of 30
 
.
The economical pressure of urban life, the ego-centric and more individualism minded of younger generations, Expensive Lifestyle that will gone when you're married and have Children, Contraception tools that give you the ability to do safe sex with anyone you like without having responsibility to marry and have children with your sex partner, the more and more energy and money that you need to raise Children.

That's pretty much the typical answer these days.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom