China's birth rate falls to historic low

[Han Patriot]

Also, what is the opinion inside China, how do Chinese people see this issue.

I know there are atleast some people who are alarmed with such demographic decline.

Chinese believes there needs to be some pain before you can enjoy a moderately prosperous society. Sooner or later whichever country who experiences dramatic population growth like China and India will also experience population decline. You either decline gracefully with some economic growth reduction, or you can decline by committing suicide due to drought. My humblest advice, you don't need a billion people to be a developed country.

Actually Indian standards continue to rise. The part of India where I live in, receives more rain water than we know what to do with. Yes, there is a problem In some areas which receive low rainfall. Better water management, and technology can help in most of the issues.

Have you ever been out of India?

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Chinese believes there needs to be some pain before you can enjoy a moderately prosperous society. Sooner or later whichever country who experiences dramatic population growth like China and India will also experience population decline. You either decline gracefully with some economic growth reduction, or you can decline by committing suicide due to drought. My humblest advice, you don't need a billion people to be a developed country.

Umm... Definitely. When did I say you need any fixed number of people to be developed.

But is that something that China would want?


Let's say today magically, China had only 1 million people, with a GDP per capita of 100k USD, (almost the highest in the world)

That would make China a small country with a GDP of 100 billion USD.

What maybe better for an individual person need not be good for the society, country, and the nation.

Also, having less people, or a declining population DOESN'T mean having higher GDP percapita.

GDP per capita has almost no correlation with land size available per capita.

Look at Mongolia. It has HUGE amounts of land and resources per capita. But its GDP per capita is a fraction that of China's.

Similarly, on the other hand look at countries like Singapore, Netherlands, etc. They are doing incredibly well even without much land and resource availability.

In fact, look at Japan, Japan today has less land per capita than even China. Yet, Japan's development levels are very high.

Development in modern world depends on quality of human resources and NOT on land availability per capita.

Chinese believes there needs to be some pain before you can enjoy a moderately prosperous society. Sooner or later whichever country who experiences dramatic population growth like China and India will also experience population decline. You either decline gracefully with some economic growth reduction, or you can decline by committing suicide due to drought. My humblest advice, you don't need a billion people to be a developed country.


Have you ever been out of India?

Also, just to point out here. China's freshwater availability is actually decent. In fact it is more than some major countries like Netherlands. (Netherlands is a surplus producer of agriculture)

The fact is that a lot of water resources will be freed by:

1. China moving out of some low level industries like textile and apparel. These require enormous amounts of water.
2. Better technology adoption.
3. Better water management.

 

[Han Patriot]

Umm... Definitely. When did I say you need any fixed number of people to be developed.

But is that something that China would want?


Let's say today magically, China had only 1 million people, with a GDP per capita of 100k USD, (almost the highest in the world)

That would make China a small country with a GDP of 100 billion USD.

What maybe better for an individual person need not be good for the society, country, and the nation.

Also, having less people, or a declining population DOESN'T mean having higher GDP percapita.

GDP per capita has almost no correlation with land size available per capita.

Look at Mongolia. It has HUGE amounts of land and resources per capita. But its GDP per capita is a fraction that of China's.

Similarly, on the other hand look at countries like Singapore, Netherlands, etc. They are doing incredibly well even without much land and resource availability.

In fact, look at Japan, Japan today has less land per capita than even China. Yet, Japan's development levels are very high.

Development in modern world depends on quality of human resources and NOT on land availability per capita.

It depends on both actually. You can't be a real power if your country/industry/population is not large enpugh. Having a lot of people who is hungry, illiterate and jobless doesn't mean you will be a superpower. Best example is India. China cannot sustain a billion people not can India, I am lazy to explain why, but if you can't open your eyes to the effects of over population in India, then you are blind. Nature is brutal, when you are unsustainable, it will find ways to correct the imbalance. Simple things like over competition for jobs in India and China, stress caused by it, early death, it's indirectly due to overpopulation and competition for resources. I see things that are subtle, not just water crisis in India, pollution....etc. China is only starting to resolve these issues and with less population, it will be easier to maintain and change.

Btw, don't need to listen to me. Just wait for the incoming dividend. With AI and automation coming....good luck!

 

[Mista]

China has a rate of 1.6 which means china population is bound to go down every year..

On the funnier side this means there are naughty people who are not abiding to ( the current non existing ) one child policy

1.6 is the adjusted 'estimated' figure by the Family Planning Commission which had a vested interest to overestimate the TFR. The FPC has been abolished by Xi.

China's National Bureau of Statistics put China's TFR at 1.05 in 2015 in their 2016 statistical yearbook. The NBS have since stopped publishing China's TFR in their yearly statistics. Who knows why did they suddenly stop publishing China's TFR?

The National Bureau of Statistics China (中华人民共和国国家统计局). The 'China Statistical Yearbook 2016' released last year recorded a TFR of 1.05 in 2015. It's based on a sample from 1% of the population.

The figure of 1.57 is from the National Population and Family Planning Commission (中华人民共和国国家人口和计划生育委员会). This figure is estimated and other international organizations such as the UN uses this figure.

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?

 

[kris]

1.6 is the adjusted 'estimated' figure by the Family Planning Commission which had a vested interest to overestimate the TFR. The FPC has been abolished by Xi.

China's National Bureau of Statistics put China's TFR at 1.05 in 2015 in their 2016 statistical yearbook. The NBS have since stopped publishing China's TFR in their yearly statistics. Who knows why did they suddenly stop publishing China's TFR?

1.05
China will be damned in 30 years

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

1.05
China will be damned in 30 years

Indeed the situation is really dire.

 

[ILC]

1.05 is wrong, or China didn't have 16,550,000 births in 2015. If the TFR is correct it was then about 10m.

 

[Mista]

1.05
China will be damned in 30 years

That was in 2015 when the OCP was still in place. Chinese demographers estimate that the 2016 TFR to be around 1.2.

1.05 is wrong, or China didn't have 16,550,000 births in 2015. If the TFR is correct it was then about 10m.

How do you come to that conclusion?

 

[AUz]

since when birth rate is extremely low ？dont BS 垃圾玩意


A China with 1Billion chinese and 0 muslim will be A perfect state.if ugyur and hui can change their belief i have No problem against them.as to tibetan they are our brothers


i only hate muslim chinese which i never consider as chinese

Lol, Islam is literally THE largest civilizational order globally. Your hatred of Islam will only make you a mental patient.

Increasingly, China and global Islamic world will have more and more interaction via trade, student exchanges, tourism, travel, foreign investments, global energy supply, international alliances etc etc. Learn to deal with your insecurities.

There are 1.8 billion Muslims in the world vs 1.4ish billion Chinese. By the end of this century, there will be 800 million Chinese and almost 4 billion Muslims in the world

Beta Chinese incels like you won’t survive in an increasingly global and mutually symbiotic future.

 

[ILC]

I've counted in approximation.
TFR in Poland was 1,5 in 2016, here is a population pyramid

And here is Chinese population pyramid.

If you compare it with Poland TFR it is impossible that Chinese TFR was such low in 2016 and 2015.
There are some explanations, NBS are taking their statistics from the ***, the second - population born was smaller than 16,5m. Third NBS has their own definition of TFR different than the rest of the world.

 

[j20blackdragon]

There is more than enough water in both India and China to sustain everyone.

I suggest you do some research on the water crisis in India.

People need more than just water to survive.

You want to build a good house, you need good construction materials.

You want a human child's brain (and body) to develop properly, you need proper nutrients.

Let's just do one quick China vs India comparison: meat production.

I know the figures are from 2010, but I don't have anything newer.

Both countries have over a billion people, but China produces 13 times more meat than India. Even a small country like Vietnam produces more than 50% of India's production. Very sad. Btw, this figure doesn't even include the amount of fish China is able to catch with the world's largest fleet of deep-sea fishing boats, or the aquaculture in China.

Want to know what happens when you have a billion malnourished Indians not getting enough protein in their diets? Low IQ. Stunted growth. Poor health. Unproductive population.

 

[Mista]

I've counted in approximation.
TFR in Poland was 1,5 in 2016, here is a population pyramid

And here is Chinese population pyramid.

If you compare it with Poland TFR it is impossible that Chinese TFR was such low in 2016 and 2015.
There are some explanations, NBS are taking their statistics from the ***, the second - population born was smaller than 16,5m. Third NBS has their own definition of TFR different than the rest of the world.

That's a very broad approximation. Do you have a more scientific approach? I can bring in South Korea (TFR 1.17 in 2016) and say their population pyramid is similar as well..?

 

[Kai Liu]

Time to put this:

And probably also this:

 

[northeast]

Time to put this:

And probably also this:

they are the best future of the human kind.europe and asia will belong to them.and your kind will be buried in dirt and left to rot..

 

[kris]

Time to put this:

And probably also this:

c
chinaisn't also is crowded. Most of China's population lies in it's east
They have better infrastructure that's all