Young Chinese not having babies

[Song Hong]

There are millions of Chinese in Vietnam. Can the Vietnamese government return these Chinese populations to us?

The are completely Vietnamized -- probably 10 x n millions of them (Most are not aware they have Chinese blood). The Vietnam culture is extremely seductive to Chinese.

There are a few pockets in Quang Ninh, HCMC and Phu Quoc who still remembers they have Chinese ancestors, but their loyalty towards Vietnam is far more than most oversea Chinese in SE Asia. You have more luck finding Malaysian Chinese aligning to China.

 

[EasyNow]

All of those areas have far higher population density than China and had no population control policies, at least nowhere to the extent of China's, and they all became very wealthy and developed. Obviously, China's One Child policy is not the reason why China became developed, it would've done so regardless of it.


Correct

All the countries you named have low birthrates. Its wrong to fixate on China's one child policy only.

It's well known that development and declining birth rate are linked. That is the reason in China too.

China like all developed societies will need to bring in new people. You can say they need to relax immigration policies.

High birthrates are not a driver for development, it is actually the symptom of a poor, insecure, uneducated society.

 

[Surya 1]

China will probably be the next Japan, collapsing birth rates, declining population but still closed off to immigration which would supplement the workforce. Collapsing populations are an issue in all of the developed world, but for China and East Asia, they are closed off to immigration so their populations will rapidly decline. In the West, immigration renews talent and vitality.

The One Child policy was a disaster. It should've never been created or it should've been repealed since the early 90s at the very least. Now the Chinese government is scrambling to get the birth rates up but young people would rather enjoy their lives and not be stuck with the expensive burden of raising kids.

Chinese government has interfered into its citizen's life too much. This is the result of the policy of Chinese government. China is a country of old citizenry which is becoming even more older.

 

[zhxy]

Population issues are exaggerated.

China has 1.4 billion people. His half close to the United States and Europe combined.

Surprisingly, many people are obsessed with theory: immigrants are the only solution to save China, China should open and receive many immigrants from around the world.

Even it is the truth, a giant country with 1.4 billion people like China, lack of population and labor at a very different level. Measures like immigration will barely make a difference on macro scale. China needs many immigrants to fill vulnerabilities: 20 million , 50 million, 100 million and more. It became the bottomless pit.

 

[mike2000 is back]

I think with Industrialization that was going to be happening eventually,only the fact that the funds necessary for retirees would have been much larger down the line ,putting further economic strain ,there's no escaping this cycle in Industrialization process.
Rural and non industrial lifestyle thrives baby boom,when people are cramped in small spaces they simply don't copulate,last thing most people want in cramped urban spaces are babies which they can't afford,such has been the traditional problem with population relocation into urban areas,since nazi Germany to the soviets. China is facing similar problem ,with the largest mobilization of rural population to cramped urban areas, in human history,
Decentralization from urban centre is necessary to tackle this,free up space and reduce cost of child upbringing.

I think the issue is that China's radical policy of ruthlessly enforcing the one child policy only accelerated this process by decades. Many Chinese women had their babies forcefully aborted and many were even sterilised to stop them from having more than one children(this in itself is a form of genocide if you look at it another way actually) this lasted for over the span of 3 decades and didn't stop until recently. This has had a tremendous impact going forward for the country and it will only get worse with time . Its too late unfortunately to turn back the clock . So the party has to deal with what they themselves have created. Its not enough
for the CCP to just be saying party members or Chinese people should have more kids is a joke, since you can't force people to procreate . Lool Sometimes I ask myself how those child policy officials even think. Lol
The one child policy was one of the most stupid policies anyone could have come up with. It not only caused social problems for the country (way more boys than girls as some Chinese men find it hard to get a Chinese women , and the psychological effects of a whole generation growing up without any siblings whatsoever. Lol) but it will also have huge economic implications for the country in future as the working age group will keep striking while dependent/old age group keeps increasing . This policy was even more stupid considering the fact that these idiots don't seem to know the obvious fact that as a country develops and gets wealthy its population will stabilise itself automatically, so they didn't need to implement such a foolish policy in the first place. It has only made things farrr worse than they should have been and brought the population decline forward by decades.
At least developed East Asian countries like Japan and Western countries got wealthy and developed for a while before they started facing this problem. However the fear with China is that the country is still by large a developing country but its already facing falling birth rates at par with ultra developed countries . So they might get old before they even get rich. That is the main fear I think.

 

[Imran Khan]

good babies are big responsibility one should not have if he/she don't want t or can not take care of them .

 

[mike2000 is back]

The concern on birth rate fall is based on habitual thinking. People are used to present economic model. We are at door of AI age. Millions, probably billions of production line workers, drivers, teachers, lawyers, doctors... will lose their jobs. Unemployment will be biggest social problem.

The world will need more creative people, less skilled people. For human resource, quality will be more important than quantity. Relatively low birth rate is necessary.

it is estimated that human life expectancy will reach to 100 years in the next 50 years.

Well, population also matters in todays modern world to be honest, especially when you have the appropriate working system and policy for your country set. Since it also gives you scale. Even if China is half as productive as Japan for example , China will still have a bigger economy than the US for example , this is the advantage of scale and population. Do you think if China had the same population as South Korea or Japan or U.K, Germany etc you will be as powerful as you are today ? No, China will have an even smaller economy than those countries to be honest . The only advantage you have over them is your scale and size/population. Reason you stand a chance to even challenge the US. Without that population size, China will just be a medium size power at best like South Korea. In the same respect, if Japan had your size and population, they will have been a super power as well long ago. In fact that scale and size coupled with their level of Industrialization/technology , they will have dwarfed the US in basically every scale imaginable long ago, and by default be a superpower setting/dictating rules by themselves as well just like the US has been doing. One of the main advantage the US had over them was the size/scale/resources and population of the US which dwarfed Japan by far in every of those field, else I don't even think it would have been possible to challenge and defeat Japan even during WWII to be honest. Even with all those advantages, it was a tough battle for the US to defeat them.

 

[kankan326]

Well, population also matters in todays modern world to be honest, especially when you have the appropriate working system and policy for your country set. Since it also gives you scale. Even if China is half as productive as Japan for example , China will still have a bigger economy than the US for example , this is the advantage of scale and population. Do you think if China had the same population as South Korea or Japan or U.K, Germany etc you will be as powerful as you are today ? No, China will have an even smaller economy than those countries to be honest . The only advantage you have over them is your scale and size/population. Reason you stand a chance to even challenge the US. Without that population size, China will just be a medium size power at best like South Korea. In the same respect, if Japan had your size and population, they will have been a super power as well long ago. In fact that scale and size coupled with their level of Industrialization/technology , they will have dwarfed the US in basically every scale imaginable long ago, and by default be a superpower setting/dictating rules by themselves as well just like the US has been doing. One of the main advantage the US had over them was the size/scale/resources and population of the US which dwarfed Japan by far in every of those field, else I don't even think it would have been possible to challenge and defeat Japan even during WWII to be honest. Even with all those advantages, it was a tough battle for the US to defeat them.

Populations are both producers and consumers. When the number of populations get to certain level. The maginal effect of population dividend will decline. If Japan has same scale population like China, it would never be good news for Japan. If Japan has same scales as China in both population and land size, western countries would not let Japan freely develop in the first place. Japan became today's Japan because it is a medium country.

China will climb to high added value products chain. Labor intensive industries will leave to robots. So even China has half of today's population, China will still surpass US.

 

[Shotgunner51]

It's well known that development and declining birth rate are linked. That is the reason in China too.

Agree! I just checked this database of fertility rate, the are 227 entries from whole world, the lowest 5 are: Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Macau, Hong Kong. Isn't the pattern obvious? It's only natural and inevitable that socially-similar China (Mainland) will end up having the same societal norm.

I don't think economy or productivity will be adversely affected. Quality of population is the key, not quantity, and technology like AI and robotics are the future of a society and its economy. Take SK as an example, its fertility rate is among lowest in the world, but it has has world's highest density of robotics (932 robots per 10000 employees), which is also common in Japan, Singapore, HK/TW and Germany. That's also exactly where China (Mainland) is heading, I believe our automation can reach Japan/Germany level by 2025, and get close to SK/Singapore level by 2030.

 

[xyxmt]

Yes QUANTITIES but zero QUALITY in these countries.

their qualities increase ten fold as soon as they leave their respective country,.

Um leave out Bangladesh. We are already finding it hard to fill apparel factory labor. We have to import many illegal labor folks from India to run factories.

Fertility rate for Bangladeshi women is lower than Indian women and also lower than replacement rate already (and rapidly falling). It was at 2.1 babies per woman two/three years ago and probably much lower now.

Once you educate women, they don't want babies.

just wondering how that tiny land mass was able to get such a huge population!!

that is bcos China makes good quality condoms.

India makes condoms that tend to burst alot.

View attachment 804258

wrong!! condoms too big for Indian men causing the overflow

 

[tower9]

But US now has serious problem of ethnic issue. Social stability are degrading. More clash between different races and culture not america. More violent shooting, Rising crime. These are the negative by letting in too many immigrants.

American race issues are deeply historical and the most contentious between blacks and whites. Black Americans are not immigrants, in fact they are more American than most Whites. Their roots run deeper in this country than most whites apart from those descended straight from the mayflower. So racial tensions are not really an immigration issue. Most Hispanic and Asian immigrants are hard workers and basically assimilate and contribute greatly to the economy.

China should allow immigration from Friendly countries including Pakistan

A policeman in China once asked me where are you from?
I told Pakistan. He smiled and said "WE ARE BROTHERS"

Of course strict vetting would take place because not everybody thinks the same way and foreign powers are working hard to bring distortion / damage to this brotherhood.

China should allow immigration for people who are well educated, skilled and productive. Even if 100 million immigrants are let in, it will not change the racial fabric much because China has a massive population. If they are well educated and skilled, they should be able to integrate economically and socially.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Well, population also matters in todays modern world to be honest, especially when you have the appropriate working system and policy for your country set. Since it also gives you scale. Even if China is half as productive as Japan for example , China will still have a bigger economy than the US for example , this is the advantage of scale and population. Do you think if China had the same population as South Korea or Japan or U.K, Germany etc you will be as powerful as you are today ? No, China will have an even smaller economy than those countries to be honest . The only advantage you have over them is your scale and size/population. Reason you stand a chance to even challenge the US. Without that population size, China will just be a medium size power at best like South Korea. In the same respect, if Japan had your size and population, they will have been a super power as well long ago. In fact that scale and size coupled with their level of Industrialization/technology , they will have dwarfed the US in basically every scale imaginable long ago, and by default be a superpower setting/dictating rules by themselves as well just like the US has been doing. One of the main advantage the US had over them was the size/scale/resources and population of the US which dwarfed Japan by far in every of those field, else I don't even think it would have been possible to challenge and defeat Japan even during WWII to be honest. Even with all those advantages, it was a tough battle for the US to defeat them.

Japan couldn't have supported a population as large as China though so your point is moot. They don't produce anywhere near enough food and have zero natural resources. That's the reason they lost WW2. If they had more population but still remained on Japan they would've just lost faster as they ran out of food and energy faster.

If China has the same land as today but only as many people as US, China's population would naturally grow within a few decades to where it is now. Proof: that's how it actually happened from 1949-1989 when China grew from US sized at 400 million to 1 billion.

China's population stagnating at 1.2-1.3 billion wouldn't be too bad. Still huge, but China's food and energy resources would be able to catch up.

 

[Zsari]

Well, population also matters in todays modern world to be honest, especially when you have the appropriate working system and policy for your country set. Since it also gives you scale. Even if China is half as productive as Japan for example , China will still have a bigger economy than the US for example , this is the advantage of scale and population. Do you think if China had the same population as South Korea or Japan or U.K, Germany etc you will be as powerful as you are today ? No, China will have an even smaller economy than those countries to be honest . The only advantage you have over them is your scale and size/population. Reason you stand a chance to even challenge the US. Without that population size, China will just be a medium size power at best like South Korea. In the same respect, if Japan had your size and population, they will have been a super power as well long ago. In fact that scale and size coupled with their level of Industrialization/technology , they will have dwarfed the US in basically every scale imaginable long ago, and by default be a superpower setting/dictating rules by themselves as well just like the US has been doing. One of the main advantage the US had over them was the size/scale/resources and population of the US which dwarfed Japan by far in every of those field, else I don't even think it would have been possible to challenge and defeat Japan even during WWII to be honest. Even with all those advantages, it was a tough battle for the US to defeat them.

Have you ever consider that overpopulation actually limited individuals productivity as the limiting factor becomes resources instead of labor? I believe there is an optimal level of population size in respect to the country's size, passing that point and the productivity would start to decline.

 

[Bilal9]

drop xenophobia, accept immigrants. let's not make japan's mistake twice.

well educated immigrants, preferably non-religious. question is, where to find those

I am sure a lot of Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Nepali, Sri Lankan intellectuals, technologists and academics educated and working in the US (in industry and academia) would be interested. Some are already going back and forth to China, I know half a dozen Bangladeshi families who live mostly in Northern China (Shanghai area) and have for a while. Chinese urban living standards in cities are at par with (or better than) US now, so this should not be an issue attracting them if CCP wants.

Every country has educated refined middle and upper middle class, and I can tell you Bangladeshi upper middle class technical intellect and talent is in no way inferior to that of the US, which they have proven in that country. And they are typically not religious zealots and are mostly Sufi (Sunni) Muslim being very open-minded and tolerant.

Middle class Bangladeshis (and above) like to confine their religious practices (if at all religious) to their own households and being private about it.

China can start by offering merit-based Visas like Canada does, but only from select countries it wishes to attract talent from.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I am sure a lot of Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Nepali, Sri Lankan intellectuals, technologists and academics educated and working in the US (in industry and academia) would be interested. Some are already going back and forth to China, I know half a dozen Bangladeshi families who live mostly in Northern China (Shanghai area) and have for a while. Chinese urban living standards in cities are at par with (or better than) US now, so this should not be an issue attracting them if CCP wants.

Every country has educated refined middle and upper middle class, and I can tell you Bangladeshi upper middle class technical intellect and talent is in no way inferior to that of the US, which they have proven in that country. And they are typically not religious zealots and are mostly Sufi (Sunni) Muslim being very open-minded and tolerant.

Middle class Bangladeshis (and above) like to confine their religious practices (if at all religious) to their own households and being private about it.

China can start by offering merit-based Visas like Canada does, but only from select countries it wishes to attract talent from.

I believe Bangladesh has more in common with ASEAN countries like Indonesia or Malaysia than South Asian countries like India.

Is there the possibility of Bangladesh joining ASEAN or RCEP?