nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

It looks like China could be reviewing their one child policy.

Run_to_da_hills

A Chinese government think tank has urged the country's leaders to start phasing out its one-child policy immediately and allow two children for every family by 2015. The unpopular restriction - which has been in place since 1980 - has led to millions fewer births, but also contributed to the ageing of China's huge population. The proposal is being given extra weight because it has been put forward by the China Development Research Foundation which is close to the government's central leadership.

Maybe this could be an indication that they are considering expanding their borders.:eek:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2225709/Is-China-scrap-child-policy-Government-think-tank-urges-leaders-allow-children-family-2015.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

bbam

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

I still don't understand how they can justify this restriction and why human rights haven't jumped on it in 30 years
Have they?

The real truth is that though it has resulted in a very skewed demographic and many other awful social issues it has avoided a famine that would make the African continent famines look like a minor shortage of food...

It really was a desperate measure to avoid a horrific impending famine and in to some extent it served its goals..

In recent years moves have been ongoing to relax the policy, particularly along the coastal more affluant cities.

[Deleted User]

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Maybe this could be an indication that they are considering expanding their borders.

Wait, I thought you'd said the world governments were getting ready to depopulate?

Wibbs wrote: »

the number of Chinese expected to enter third level is likely to near halve by 2014.

I have to ask, compared to when?

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I have to ask, compared to when?

Compared to the last two decades growth kinda thing. They had a huge population of young and cheap workers that fueled their economic miracle* and that's dropping like a stone. This will impact their productivity. It will also impact their costs. Dropping working population means that workers that are coming into the system can charge more for their work, so costs go up. They may try to outsource to Africa, hence one of their interests in the place. Either way it's a troubling problem for them.

On their presence in Africa. I watched a documentary on same a while back. The locals were getting increasingly pissed off with the Chinese. I could see why. When the Chinese were interviewed many of their attitudes to the locals would have not been out of place at a genteel garden party at the hight of European colonialism.

*Historically speaking it seems when you hear the words "economic miracle" attached to a country previously below the radar it's almost a given it'll be followed by the words "economic downturn" even collapse.

pauldla

Wibbs wrote: »

On their presence in Africa. I watched a documentary on same a while back. The locals were getting increasingly pissed off with the Chinese. I could see why. When the Chinese were interviewed many of their attitudes to the locals would have not been out of place at a genteel garden party at the hight of European colonialism.

Yeah. They really do look down on them. Do you remember that incident a little while back where the Chinese managers opened fire on their African staff with shotguns? And as for the tensions around Chocolate City in Guangzhou...

Father Damo

sdeire wrote: »

You see this:

and infer this:

Here's a conspiracy theory: maybe RTDH is a paranoid delusional?

I reckon RTDH is a CIA operative tasked with coming up with stuff so nonsensical (Obama physically resembling Hitler being my personal favourite) that when anyone would dare come up with any type of plausible conspiracy theory we would all just label them as a delusional nut, and the CIA then goes on to carry out their nefarious plot with imounity.

My 2 cents :pac: (2 cent coin which ias been used to lift my DNA profile to CIA hq upon touching it of course)

TwoShedsJackson

Father Damo wrote: »

(Obama physically resembling Hitler being my personal favourite)

Got a link to this gem? Can't be arsed trawling through his demented post history.

Run_to_da_hills

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Got a link to this gem? Can't be arsed trawling through his demented post history.

You won't find it because it is a figment of his imagination.

However I did post several comparisons between Adolph Hitler and Barack Obama.

TwoShedsJackson

Now don't tease, give us a recap of the similarities?

Run_to_da_hills

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Now don't tease, give us a recap of the similarities?

Some people would say it is quite unfair to compare Hitler to Obama. After all, Hitler started WWII and killed 11,000,000 Jews and dissidents at various death camps, and Obama has done nothing like that.

I would say it's only unfair if you compare Hitler at the end of his rule to the beginning of Obama's. But if there is a comparison made between Hitler and Obama at the beginning of their rise to power, it's extremely fair

Here's some of the similarities:

Powerful speeches to hypnotize and control the eager masses who came to hear them speak.

Both Hitler and Obama held rallies in huge outdoor stadiums to excite and inflame the people's passions.

Both Hitler and Obama had ghost written autobiographies prior to the start of their run for political office. Hitler wrote Mein Kampf (My Struggle), and Obama wrote Dreams Of My Father. Both men then wrote a second book talking about their goals for German and America. Hitler wrote A New World Order, and Obama wrote The Audacity of Hope.

Both Hitler and Obama originally had last names that were changed later in life. Hitler used to be Schickelbruber, and Obama's last name was Soetoro.

Both Hitler and Obama hid their real identifies. Hiter had a Jewish ancestry, and Obama a Muslim one. But unlike Hitler, Obama flaunted his Muslim roots in his start as a politician in order to defuse the inevitable firestorm. His ploy of "hiding in plain sight" worked very well.

Both Hitler and Obama advocate using young people as a driving force to create an "army" of youth dedicated to their Ideals. Hitler had his Hitler Youth, and Obama his Obama Youth Brigade.

Both Hitler and Obama received Messianic comparisons, and both men had songs of adoration written about them and for them.

Both men had their own logos.

There is quite a lot more to add to this including the stark similarities between Obamacare and Hitler's T4 programme.

donalg1

For someone who is so caught up in conspiracies you sure do spend a lot of time on the auld internet, which is probably the worst place you could be. They are watching you right now RTDH.

Drakares

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Some people would say it is quite unfair to compare Hitler to Obama. After all, Hitler started WWII and killed 11,000,000 Jews and dissidents at various death camps, and Obama has done nothing like that.

I would say it's only unfair if you compare Hitler at the end of his rule to the beginning of Obama's. But if there is a comparison made between Hitler and Obama at the beginning of their rise to power, it's extremely fair

Here's some of the similarities:

Powerful speeches to hypnotize and control the eager masses who came to hear them speak.

Both Hitler and Obama held rallies in huge outdoor stadiums to excite and inflame the people's passions.

Both Hitler and Obama had ghost written autobiographies prior to the start of their run for political office. Hitler wrote Mein Kampf (My Struggle), and Obama wrote Dreams Of My Father. Both men then wrote a second book talking about their goals for German and America. Hitler wrote A New World Order, and Obama wrote The Audacity of Hope.

Both Hitler and Obama originally had last names that were changed later in life. Hitler used to be Schickelbruber, and Obama's last name was Soetoro.

Both Hitler and Obama hid their real identifies. Hiter had a Jewish ancestry, and Obama a Muslim one. But unlike Hitler, Obama flaunted his Muslim roots in his start as a politician in order to defuse the inevitable firestorm. His ploy of "hiding in plain sight" worked very well.

Both Hitler and Obama advocate using young people as a driving force to create an "army" of youth dedicated to their Ideals. Hitler had his Hitler Youth, and Obama his Obama Youth Brigade.

Both Hitler and Obama received Messianic comparisons, and both men had songs of adoration written about them and for them.

Both men had their own logos.

There is quite a lot more to add to this including the stark similarities between Obamacare and Hitler's T4 programme.

Hitler had a moustache - I have a moustache

Hitler spoke German - I speak German

Hitler was Catholic - I am Catholic

Hitler once had diarrhea - I once had diarrhea

Hitler wore a coat - I wear a coat

By your logic, I = Hitler? :eek:

super_furry

Demented. No other work for it, just.....demented.

Duggys Housemate

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Some people would say it is quite unfair to compare Hitler to Obama. After all, Hitler started WWII and killed 11,000,000 Jews and dissidents at various death camps, and Obama has done nothing like that.

I would say it's only unfair if you compare Hitler at the end of his rule to the beginning of Obama's. But if there is a comparison made between Hitler and Obama at the beginning of their rise to power, it's extremely fair

Here's some of the similarities:

Powerful speeches to hypnotize and control the eager masses who came to hear them speak.

Both Hitler and Obama held rallies in huge outdoor stadiums to excite and inflame the people's passions.

Both Hitler and Obama had ghost written autobiographies prior to the start of their run for political office. Hitler wrote Mein Kampf (My Struggle), and Obama wrote Dreams Of My Father. Both men then wrote a second book talking about their goals for German and America. Hitler wrote A New World Order, and Obama wrote The Audacity of Hope.

Both Hitler and Obama originally had last names that were changed later in life. Hitler used to be Schickelbruber, and Obama's last name was Soetoro.

Both Hitler and Obama hid their real identifies. Hiter had a Jewish ancestry, and Obama a Muslim one. But unlike Hitler, Obama flaunted his Muslim roots in his start as a politician in order to defuse the inevitable firestorm. His ploy of "hiding in plain sight" worked very well.

Both Hitler and Obama advocate using young people as a driving force to create an "army" of youth dedicated to their Ideals. Hitler had his Hitler Youth, and Obama his Obama Youth Brigade.

Both Hitler and Obama received Messianic comparisons, and both men had songs of adoration written about them and for them.

Both men had their own logos.

There is quite a lot more to add to this including the stark similarities between Obamacare and Hitler's T4 programme.

Other similarities.

Both are male.
Both were about the same age on getting to power.
Both have two eyes.
Both have two legs.
Both have more than one testicle.
Both wear suits, and dress up for formal occasions.
Both sleep in beds.
Neither have travelled to the moon.

A holocaust in inevitable.

Run_to_da_hills

Drakares wrote: »

Hitler had a moustache - I have a moustache

Hitler spoke German - I speak German

Hitler was Catholic - I am Catholic

Hitler spoke - I speak

Hitler wore a coat - I wear a coat

By your logic, I = Hitler? :eek:

But at least you don't go about arming terrorists and indiscriminately murdering civilians on foreign soil with unmanned drones.

Duggys Housemate

Drakares wrote: »

Hitler had a moustache - I have a moustache

Hitler spoke German - I speak German

Hitler was Catholic - I am Catholic

Hitler once had diarrhea - I once had diarrhea

Hitler wore a coat - I wear a coat

By your logic, I = Hitler? :eek:

two holocausts now inevitable.

Duggys Housemate

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

But at least you don't go about arming terrorists and indiscriminately murdering civilians on foreign soil with unmanned drones.

See thats the logic you should apply to Obama and Hitler.

Obama is not a racist.
Obama is not intending to kill millions of jews, or slavs.

He does make political speeches, as hitler did.

Drakares

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

But at least you don't go about arming terrorists and indiscriminately murdering civilians on foreign soil with unmanned drones.

That's what I tell the ladies!

Duggys Housemate

Anyway, China.

A 1 child policy is a good idea to stop population growth, however the problem is that it will eventually reduce the population exponentially. Down to one person over time in fact. This reduction is hidden because of previous population "momentum" but once it kicks in it is rapid. Increasing to 2 children will not stuck the drop now, but halt it later.

ando

Sorry guys I don't normally come to After Hours, but I heard China is invading Australia, is that right??

Father Damo

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

You won't find it because it is a figment of his imagination.

However I did post several comparisons between Adolph Hitler and Barack Obama.

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Got a link to this gem? Can't be arsed trawling through his demented post history.

Indeed he did.

And while I am way too lazy to find the actual post, you mentioned that they bare a striking physical resemblance if one dscounts moustache and skin colour.

Which is as tenous as saying that if I discount the old woman next doors wrinkles, blue rinse, saggy hung down tits, walking stick, and glasses, she closely resembles Mila Kunis.

Right, Im off to shag the nost beautiful lookalike woman in the world if I can ignore the bad parts......

Father Damo

ando wrote: »

Sorry guys I don't normally come to After Hours, but I heard China is invading Australia, is that right??

From what I see here, Cork is :pac:

Father Damo

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Some people would say it is quite unfair to compare Hitler to Obama. After all, Hitler started WWII and killed 11,000,000 Jews and dissidents at various death camps, and Obama has done nothing like that.

I would say it's only unfair if you compare Hitler at the end of his rule to the beginning of Obama's. But if there is a comparison made between Hitler and Obama at the beginning of their rise to power, it's extremely fair

Here's some of the similarities:

Powerful speeches to hypnotize and control the eager masses who came to hear them speak.

Both Hitler and Obama held rallies in huge outdoor stadiums to excite and inflame the people's passions.

Both Hitler and Obama had ghost written autobiographies prior to the start of their run for political office. Hitler wrote Mein Kampf (My Struggle), and Obama wrote Dreams Of My Father. Both men then wrote a second book talking about their goals for German and America. Hitler wrote A New World Order, and Obama wrote The Audacity of Hope.

Both Hitler and Obama originally had last names that were changed later in life. Hitler used to be Schickelbruber, and Obama's last name was Soetoro.

Both Hitler and Obama hid their real identifies. Hiter had a Jewish ancestry, and Obama a Muslim one. But unlike Hitler, Obama flaunted his Muslim roots in his start as a politician in order to defuse the inevitable firestorm. His ploy of "hiding in plain sight" worked very well.

Both Hitler and Obama advocate using young people as a driving force to create an "army" of youth dedicated to their Ideals. Hitler had his Hitler Youth, and Obama his Obama Youth Brigade.

Both Hitler and Obama received Messianic comparisons, and both men had songs of adoration written about them and for them.

Both men had their own logos.

There is quite a lot more to add to this including the stark similarities between Obamacare and Hitler's T4 programme.

So how good of a blowjob does Donald Trump give you anyway?

Funglegunk

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Anyway, China.

A 1 child policy is a good idea to stop population growth, however the problem is that it will eventually reduce the population exponentially. Down to one person over time in fact. This reduction is hidden because of previous population "momentum" but once it kicks in it is rapid. Increasing to 2 children will not stuck the drop now, but halt it later.

The problem is that it has created an ageing population who depend on a single child per family to provide for them after they retire. This has created a young Chinese population who are absolutely obsessed with money, and have a massive burden placed on them by their parents and grandparents to be successful. Suicide rates are very high in China, not to mention there is an imminent demographic and economic implosion.

[Deleted User]

Wibbs wrote: »

Compared to the last two decades growth kinda thing. They had a huge population of young and cheap workers that fueled their economic miracle* and that's dropping like a stone.

I'm gonna have to push for dates because I'm not buying the half figure at face value and the vagueness ain't convincing me. Half compared to 2004? 1994?

Duggys Housemate

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm gonna have to push for dates because I'm not buying the half figure at face value and the vagueness ain't convincing me. Half compared to 2004? 1994?

well if the 1 child policy is working, it would in the next generation. Say 25-30 years.

Royal Legend

Personally I think they should bring that in here for certain individuals, politicians for one, maybe even a no child policy for them would be even better

4zn76tysfajdxp

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Some people would say it is quite unfair to compare Hitler to Obama. After all, Hitler started WWII and killed 11,000,000 Jews and dissidents at various death camps, and Obama has done nothing like that.

Yet. :mad:

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm gonna have to push for dates because I'm not buying the half figure at face value and the vagueness ain't convincing me. Half compared to 2004? 1994?

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

well if the 1 child policy is working, it would in the next generation. Say 25-30 years.

It's happening now.

Quick google.. http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2010/09/china-population-wang

The ripple effects of fertility decline have begun to emerge everywhere in China these days. In 1995, primary schools nationwide enrolled 25.3 million new students. By 2008, that number had shrunk by one-third, to only 16.7 million. In 1990, China had over 750,000 primary schools. By 2008, due to the combined effects of fertility decline and educational reforms, the number of primary schools nationwide had fallen to about 300,000. In a country where getting into a university has always been a matter of intense competition and anxiety, the number of applicants to universities has begun to decline in the past couple of years.

Between the early nineties and the late noughties China closed 450,000 primary schools. That's a huge drop and over half.

Some more nuggets from that link;

By 2013 China’s demographic dividend growth rate will turn negative: That is, the growth rate of net consumers will exceed the growth rate of net producers.

he number of workers aged 20 to 29 will stay about the same for the next few years, but a precipitous drop will begin in the middle of the coming decade. Over a 10-year period, between 2016 and 2026, the size of the population in this age range will be reduced by about one-quarter, to 150 million from 200 million. For Chinese aged 20 to 24, that decline will come sooner and will be more drastic: Over the next decade, their number will be reduced by nearly 50 percent, to 68 million from 125 million.

And that's just the young, the drivers of an economy, the aged numbers are just as scary.

Another link to peruse; http://www.worldcrunch.com/china-cooking-books-its-census-data/culture-society/is-china-cooking-the-books-on-its-census-data-/c3s3017/#.UJKc2o4hd8w

hina’s labor age group of the 15-64 years old will reach its peak in 2013, and then start to decrease. Changes to the 19-22 years old age group are key to a country’s demographic health, because they are the most active part of the population and what business needs most. In 2009, this age group attained an historical high of 100 million but will rapidly decrease to 58 million by 2019, a drop of 43% over just 10 years.

And

In 2009, the number of university applicants had already decreased by 400,000. In 2010, it decreased by 700,000.

China is set to repeat Japan’s economic recession experience of the 1990s. The difference is Japan became rich before growing old, while China is growing old before even getting rich. The average GDP of Japan today is above $40,000, while it is still just $4,000 in China.Actually I remember the 80's when "they're gonna take over the world you know" was aimed at Japan and look at what happened there and Japan was building on a much better foundation than China, politically and culturally.

Throw in the biggest commodities bubble in history and it doesn't look so rosy at all. Now the way the state financing in China works compared to free banks in the west, they have some leverage, but the bubble will burst, just later and likely in a more massive way.

Like I said that was a quick google I'm sure you could find more expansive/links info out there.

[Deleted User]

I don't see 2014 mentioned anywhere there and from you did actually post it seems a bit early for levels to fall to half of an undefined peak.

There's major bumps ahead for China, different ones to what other countries have faced and it'll be interesting to see how they handle it. When one bears in mind the millions and millions working in manufacturing there's still room for an increase in the proportion of people going into education instead if they export manufacturing to now-poorer countries.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see 2014 mentioned anywhere there and from you did actually post it seems a bit early for levels to fall to half of an undefined peak.

Well shoot me down in flames I was running off memory,:) but if you want to be pedantic... The population of 15-64 year olds will peak in 2013 and thereafter decline. The number of 19-22 year olds will halve between 2009 and 2019. So split the diff and 2014 works well enough as a peak. That oncoming wave of decline is also evident from the drop in their primary school enrollements.

There's major bumps ahead for China, different ones to what other countries have faced and it'll be interesting to see how they handle it. When one bears in mind the millions and millions working in manufacturing there's still room for an increase in the proportion of people going into education instead if they export manufacturing to now-poorer countries.

Possibly. The other major bumps of not getting rich before they age and their construction boom(and other booms on the back of it) don't bode well. The economic slow down in the markets they sell to doesn't help as there's not enough of them rich enough to buy what they produce. Japan weathered it's own demographic issue better because there was. Never mind the growing divide between the urban and the rural. They've a robust and ancient culture and they're hardly short of brains*, but IMHO it'll take a miracle for them to navigate what's coming down the line.

*ASIDE though contrary to popular belief it was only in the Tang dynasty, roughly equating to our Dark Ages where China's per capita worth and productivity was higher than Europe's overall. After that the diffs between an average Chinese and an average European grew decade by decade. A Chinese Farmer of 1000 AD wouldn't have noted much of a diff between him and a farmer in 1800, whereas a European farmer would.

As a civilisation/empire/culture they historically go from brief flowerings of change and real innovation followed by long periods of stagnation. It comes from being a centralised and monolithic empire, rather than a country or more a group of countries. In that sense Rome falling was one of the best things to happen to Europe as an area. Increased competition between smaller nation states brought faster innovation and progress in it's wake.

The invention of movable type printing a good example. It was invented in China and Korea and they used it for printing paper money(another Chinese invention) and small scale religious texts. However when it gets to Europe(via the(again monolithic) Islamic world, who also didn't do much with it. Even the first printed Quran came out of the west) there is an explosion of printed works and arguably the first information revolution and it exploded within a generation. Nothing to do with Europeans as a population, but all to do with competition. I strongly suspect if Rome was still going as a working empire at the time, it wouldnt have happened the way it did.

Further aside, I think this is one reason why the Chinese and the west don't get each others take on Tibet. We see it as a separate country, they see it as part of "China", within the imperial boundary. I suspect a Roman would see the Chinese position more clearly. I also find Tibet and western attitudes to it interesting in another way. The west tends to be dubious about theocratic states, yet is gung ho for Tibet to return to one(a kinda dubious one historically too).