Guest:
Login
|
Register
|
Search
|
FAQ
Chinadaily BBS
»
News Talk
»
China Today
» Why China cannot be over-populated?
Last Thread
Next Thread
21
1/2
1
2
>
Subject: Why China cannot be over-populated?
chinadaily
(chinadaily)
SuperModerator
UID 9672
Digest Posts
3
Credits 2432
Posts 1661
Registered 1970-1-1
Status Offline
Why China cannot be over-populated?
written by Overpopulation 2007-03-02 09:06
Chinese people must stop overpopulating China. It can cripple China's advancement.
If China cannot feed, educate, and employ all these extra people, China will continue to have hoards of poor people. Thus, China will continue to suffer as a third world nation.
Here is a scenario. If in 2005 China has a wealth of $1 trillion and a population of 1 billion, then China has a per capital wealth is $1000 per person.
If in 2020 China's economy quadruples to $4 trillion and the population grows to 3 billion, China's per capita wealth is ~$1333.33 per person.
However, if in 2020, China has controlled its population growth so that China's population is still only 1 billion, then China's per capita wealth is $4000 per person.
More wealth per person = more education, food, and opportunities per person = higher quality person = a better Chinese nation.
Overpopulation will keep China perpetually poor. China must stop overpopulation.
2007-3-2 08:11 PM
#1
pjtran
(陳青龍 aka 真多花色)
Super Member
UID 119233
Digest Posts 0
Credits 6616
Posts 5074
Registered 2006-12-2
Location 唐人街
Status Offline
what do i think...
greetings! i feel china should let some of its people living aboard, because as of now china has too many elderly (in a sense, not too productive) & too many graduates fight for the same job (many of them working in not related field) , also china should free the solely child policy to re-entering the "new china" . thank you for reading! peter
2007-3-2 11:13 PM
#2
greatwall_sg
Newcomer
UID 114521
Digest Posts 0
Credits 42
Posts 42
Registered 2006-10-18
Status Offline
QUOTE:
If China cannot feed, educate, and employ all these extra people, China will continue to have hoards of poor people. Thus, China will continue to suffer as a third world nation.
Here is a scenario. If in 2005 China has a wealth of $1 trillion and a population of 1 billion, then China has a per capital wealth is $1000 per person.
If in 2020 China's economy quadruples to $4 trillion and the population grows to 3 billion, China's per capita wealth is ~$1333.33 per person.
However, if in 2020, China has controlled its population growth so that China's population is still only 1 billion, then China's per capita wealth is $4000 per person.
More wealth per person = more education, food, and opportunities per person = higher quality person = a better Chinese nation.
You seem to be very pessimistic about China's future, most foreigners and mainland Chinese on the other hand are optimistic. Firstly, last year, China's population grew only <7million or 0.53%, US grew at 1%. At current trend China's population will stabilise at about 1440 million, thereafter a steady decline. China's total fertility rate (TFR) is 1.73, less than US at 2.09. It takes TFR of 2.1 to maintain the same population. East Asian everywhere has TFR of <1.9. Taiwan province at 1.57, Japan 1.4, South Korea 1.27, Singapore 1.06, Macau SAR 1.02 and Hong Kong SAR at 0.95. The last three are the world's lowest in TFR, therefore in order to remain competitive the governments in these places are encouraging people to have more babies. But people nowadays want to enjoy life, so this double income no kids (dinks) phenomenon is very common now. These places encourage immigration from China to maintain their racial makeup and remain competitive. Even Shanghai in the last 2 years encounter negative population growth. There is a danger that China may be doing too good a job. When people become wealthy there is a tendency to have fewer babies.
China's nominal GDP last year was 21 trillion rmb or US$2.68 trillion, but at purchasing power parity GDP it is US$10.1 trillion compared to USA of US$12.98 trillion. If China continue at this rate by 2010 it will have a bigger PPP GDP than USA. Very likely China will surpass Germany in nominal GDP this year and Japan by 2011. As long as one don't go overseas and buy only local products, it is PPP GDP that is important. Nominal GDP/capita last year was US$2034 and US$7680 at PPP GDP same as Ukraine. Goldman Sachs speculated that the RMB might rise 10% this year, and like other countries, nominal and PPP gap will narrow considerably.
It is India/Bangladesh/Africa/Philippines that have to worry, not China
2007-3-3 01:12 AM
#3
whiteeclipse
Primary Member
UID 108562
Digest Posts 0
Credits 145
Posts 142
Registered 2006-8-15
Status Offline
True but every country needs cheap labour and as you can tell America is addicted to it which is why USA will not build a full fence between Mexico and USA, if we didn't have cheap labour (Mexicans) then our economy would suffer.
By that time when the Chinese urban class becomes rich, they would have no problem providing education to the rural population.
China will always need cheap labour but if it can't find it within then it will import it which will produce alot of problems as it is happening in Japan for example with fast increasing crime.
It's true India/Bangladesh/Africa/(not sure about the Philippines) that need to worry, not China.
2007-3-3 02:59 AM
#4
uligen
Newcomer
UID 109694
Digest Posts 0
Credits 25
Posts 25
Registered 2006-8-26
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
chinadaily
at 2007-3-2 20:11
written by Overpopulation 2007-03-02 09:06
Chinese people must stop overpopulating China. It can cripple China's advancement.
If China cannot feed, educate, and employ a ...
You seem to think that a person is a burden, not a resource. It is PEOPLE that creates GDP. Look at South Korea. If China had only 500 million people, China would naturally have a lower GDP than today. In the future, the ratio of old people to working-age people will be very skewed, creating a depressing situation both for many old people who need care, but might not get it, the economy as a whole who could've used money on science and research instead of huge sums on pensions and health, and also for businesses who can't find the needed labor force and will suffer on the balance sheet as a result (And thus GDP). So it is a lose, lose, lose situation. One-child policy is a disastrous policy for the future. Chinese people are not from Mars, chinese people act and behave like other normal people, and they don't need this one-child policy to have fewer babies. In this modern world, we have contraception, urbanization, individualism, female higher education.
The person above me says alot of truth, but it is not true as is said above that Taiwan province has a fertility rate of 1,57. Taiwan's fertility rate is 1,1 children per woman, the lowest in the world (Population reference beureau). The authorities tries to increase it, but it is impossible. The same will be true for for the mainland in the future. We see the same happening in the mainland too, where people in the citites have fewer and fewer children, well belowe replacement rate. This WILL be disastrous for China in the future, make no mistake about it. Every country with low fertility rates today tries to increase it, because they know that the next generation will suffer as a result. The countries that today are the oldest countries, like Germany, Japan and Italy, all have very sluggish growth. They don't want to have such low birth rates and rapid aging, but they can't do anything about it. This will be the case with China too. China will never again have above replacement fertility rate and will forever have a population decline. Unlike other countries, immigration won't help in China either to increase the labor force. China will be old and grey, and fade away. The US and India will be young and vibrant, and lead the world.
[
Last edited by uligen at 2007-3-3 05:10 AM
]
2007-3-3 04:48 AM
#5
whiteeclipse
Primary Member
UID 108562
Digest Posts 0
Credits 145
Posts 142
Registered 2006-8-15
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
uligen
at 2007-3-3 04:48
You seem to think that a person is a burden, not a resource. It is PEOPLE that creates GDP. Look at South Korea. If China had only 500 million people, China would naturally have a lower GDP tha ...
I agree the aging population will be a problem for many developed countries, I will be watching Japan for the next 10-20 years because the same thing will happen to China in 50 years. But because Sweden has a low birthrate they are trying to increase the birthrate by providing 9 months off work and the government provides 80% of their income for women and also employees get more time off to spend with the family so basically they provide better benefits for people that have kids and the ones that don't have kids are angry about this but it's not helping much for the birthrate. Also, Russia is providing 10,000 USD for families that have a second child but still it's not working to help boost the birthrate.
[
Last edited by whiteeclipse at 2007-3-3 06:23 AM
]
2007-3-3 06:18 AM
#6
uligen
Newcomer
UID 109694
Digest Posts 0
Credits 25
Posts 25
Registered 2006-8-26
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
whiteeclipse
at 2007-3-3 06:18
I agree the aging population will be a problem for many developed countries, I will be watching Japan for the next 10-20 years because the same thing will happen to China in 50 years. But beca ...
Exactly. No country has ever managed to increase the fertility rate to replacement level from a level well below replacement. Japan is DOOMED. South Korea is going the same way. They have a ridiculously low 1,1 total fertility rate! Even lower than Japan, and they will very soon experience a huge aging burden on their economy, as Japan, but Japan is 10-15 years ahead of them. I know the swedish system quite well, and it might have helped the fertility rate from falling to the disastrous German or South European levels. You are right, even with such an expensive system, they still aren't able to get the fertility rate higher than around 1,6-1,8, which it has hovered around for the last few decades in Sweden. Russia as you say is desperate too. The worst situation is in Ukraine. There, the population is decreasing by 0,8% per year, migration not included! But overall, the whole of Eastern Europe is in a dire situation.
Why does the mainland insist that they will be poor with more people, when the examples of the complete opposite is right in front of them? South Korea just shows that it's no problem having a very high population density (much higher than China) and low resources per person, and still be well-off. Japan and Taiwan as well.
2007-3-3 07:15 AM
#7
greatwall_sg
Newcomer
UID 114521
Digest Posts 0
Credits 42
Posts 42
Registered 2006-10-18
Status Offline
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publicat ... order/2127rank.html
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publicat ... order/2001rank.html
Sorry, the total fertility rates and economic statistics that I have given are from the above links. Whereas for the Philippines, she has a TFR of 3.11and a massive population of almost 90 million with a land area of 300,000 sq km, a population density 2.2 times of China.
Too big a population is a burden more than an asset. The question then is what is the optimum population for China. I think the present situation is just about right. China is still a net exporter of foodstuffs. With better agricultural technology, I am sure she can feed her population when it stabilises. The problem is oil, gas and other raw materials. Although China has the world's 3rd most natural resources, behind Russia and the US, she has a huge population that aspire to be rich. Imagine if car ownership is as high as the US, how much oil will she need?
The solution would be technology, recycling, conservation and efficient use of raw materials. Will China grow old before she get rich, no problem, raise the retirement age to 65, like more developed countries are doing. This will also make life more meaningful for old people, afterall life expectancy in China is 73 years. You just can't sit at home and do nothing, you will go senile and fall sick quicker.
Thus I am still very optimistic about China. But for the rest of the 3rd world, I am very pessimistic, how are they going to feed their people, where are the raw materials going to come from?
2007-3-3 07:21 AM
#8
uligen
Newcomer
UID 109694
Digest Posts 0
Credits 25
Posts 25
Registered 2006-8-26
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
greatwall_sg
at 2007-3-3 07:21
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publicat ... order/2127rank.html
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publicat ... order/2001rank.html
Sorry, the total fertility rate ...
Yes, the CIA Factbook is usually APPROXIMATELY correct, but sometimes it isn't up to date or is simply way off, like net migration rates for a number of countries just to take one example. Population reference bureau is reliable, they use up-to-date data from national statistical agencies or where it isn't available; estimates by experts:
http://www.prb.org/pdf06/06WorldDataSheet.pdf
Is The Philippines really that overpopulated? The Phillippines has almost 87 million people on 300 000 sq km, where ca.30% is arable. South Korea has 49 million people on less than a third of the area of the Philippines, where 19% is arable. Which country is the most overpopulated and which country is the richest? You tell me.
In African countries, they have huge areas with plenty of natural resources and low population densities, yet they are the poorest countries in the world. Are they overpopulated? Being rich or poor is not about having lots of natural resources per person. In the old days, people used to think like this. In today's modern market economy, it is the people, human capital, who is the resource.
When it comes to aging problem and retirement age. Very well, as the rapid aging continues, the countries worst affected would need to increase the retirement age substantially, while old people in countries with replacement rate fertility have the luxury to retire earlier if they want to. But even if you ban the retirement age altogether, forcing everybody to work until they lie in their grave, mother nature is still present. Imagine the amount of old peple with lung diseases in China in the future, with their horrible smoking habit and bad air quality. Old people get fragile and severe illnesses, they can't work as fast or as much as young people and it is more difficult to teach an old dog new tricks, they are also less entrepreneurial and risk-takers, which is vital in today's fast-paced modern economy. It is no coincidence that people have a harder time finding a new job when they're in their 50s or 60s.
Furthermore, China's labor force is largely based on manual labor, industry etc, which is not very good for old people compared to a private office job in the service sector. In this respect, old people in Japan, with an economy based on the service sector, will have a better time as they also have education for it. Another problem with an old population is of course that old people generally are savers and not consumers, not in line with the shift in China's economic structure. We see it very much in Japan today.
[
Last edited by uligen at 2007-3-3 09:31 AM
]
2007-3-3 08:17 AM
#9
chinadaily
(chinadaily)
SuperModerator
UID 9672
Digest Posts
3
Credits 2432
Posts 1661
Registered 1970-1-1
Status Offline
1.2 billion?
intertesing readings above, many thanks, forumites.
then, how many of a number is the best China should keep, to maintain its labor competitiveness. I guess it as 1.2 billion, okay?
2007-3-3 05:40 PM
#10
wertynest
Primary Member
UID 132992
Digest Posts 0
Credits 187
Posts 186
Registered 2007-4-13
Status Offline
It's not about numbers, it's about momentum.
You need enough people in one generation to feed the one after and to create the next one.
Nowadays, Chinese people are globally sparing too much money, because China's system won't help them with healthcare and retirement, and they can't rely on the next generation like they traditionnaly did before.
This is a huge problem, because it keeps consumption very low, and keep the GDP dependant on foreign investments, that may withdraw anytime, should a problem occur (Taiwan, global recession, politic instability, whatever).
The one child policy is acceptable now because the generation just before the last one is the biggest China EVER encountered. But as said before, it's very unlikely, even in a very traditionnal country like China, that rate fertility kicks back in big cities.
2007-4-19 09:58 PM
#11
tekvicious
(Hybrid Theory)
Senior Member
UID 26572
Digest Posts 0
Credits 3577
Posts 3146
Registered 2004-4-10
Location East Shangbang
Status
Online
It is not just natural resources, but having a system of government that has a system of checks and balances and that is accountable to the people. That is Africa's main problem. They are too impatient and therefore can't keep on track long enough to make th headway needed to have lasting changes.
If China has the 1 child policy then TIME will take care of the population problem.
You want to speed up? Have a war against a worthy opponent. Russia or US.
2007-4-20 11:10 AM
#12
safaribehn
Primary Member
UID 116147
Digest Posts 0
Credits 359
Posts 354
Registered 2006-11-1
Location Oslo, Norway
Status Offline
It is much more dagerous for a large country like China to be overpopulated than it is for a small one like South Korea, because a small country can always buy more food if they can not produce enough, but where can an overpoulated China or India buy enough food from?
But China has atleast acted and will probably be ok, but will have to deal with the difficulties of an ageing population instead.
2007-4-28 06:38 AM
#13
correction
Senior Member
UID 53784
Digest Posts 0
Credits 4697
Posts 3415
Registered 2005-1-20
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
uligen
at 2007-3-3 04:48
You seem to think that a person is a burden, not a resource. It is PEOPLE that creates GDP. Look at South Korea. If China had only 500 million people, China would naturally have a lower GDP tha ...
Imagine a poor family with just the man earning a living, very low income hardly have enough for himself and his wife. If he does not have any family planning, sire children almost yearly during their reproductive years, perhaps up to 10 or more children, wouldn' t that be a big burder on him and his wife?
His children when grown up could be a resource to him only if he had sufficient financial resouces to give them proper education, medical care and decent housing to grow and thrive.
If he fail to give sufficient foods, education, medical care and decent house to his children to live in, his children with little opporunity for education or skills will more likely to repeat the same cycle like his father. This kind of scenerio is seen in most 3rd world countries with huge slums teeming with poor people with no way out!
Is that good for China?
2007-4-30 04:17 PM
#14
wxd312
Primary Member
UID 134988
Digest Posts 0
Credits 71
Posts 69
Registered 2007-5-3
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
pjtran
at 2007-3-2 23:13
greetings! i feel china should let some of its people living aboard, because as of now china has too many elderly (in a sense, not too productive) & too many graduates fight for the same job ( ...
wow it's impossible i think.maybe we should get a better ideal
2007-5-5 05:43 PM
#15
obbyto
Primary Member
UID 130683
Digest Posts 0
Credits 99
Posts 95
Registered 2007-3-24
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
chinadaily
at 2-3-2007 12:11
written by Overpopulation 2007-03-02 09:06
Chinese people must stop overpopulating China. It can cripple China's advancement.
If China cannot feed, educate, and employ a ...
You're just stating something everyone knows - heard of the One-child Policy?
2007-5-10 09:27 PM
#16
exportedkiwi
Senior Member
UID 131086
Digest Posts 0
Credits 5734
Posts 5689
Registered 2007-3-27
Location In the PRC
Status Offline
Reply #2 pjtran's post
China should let some of its people live abroad....they do now, and you're also assuming that many countries would want to assimilate yet another race into their melting pot! china doesn't have the decision, the countries which are preferred destinations do!
2007-9-15 12:48 PM
#17
tradervic
(Uncle Laowai)
VIP Member
UID 135031
Digest Posts 0
Credits 24276
Posts 20856
Registered 2007-5-4
Location Cincinnati, OH - U.S.A.
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
chinadaily
at 2007-3-2 06:11
written by Overpopulation 2007-03-02 09:06
Chinese people must stop overpopulating China. It can cripple China's advancement.
If China cannot feed, educate, and employ a ...
What is the old saying - a picture speaks a thousand words.
Image Attachment:
0035-001M.jpg
(2007-9-17 07:17 PM, 86.38 K)
2007-9-17 07:17 PM
#18
emucentral
(JB)
Super Member
UID 61916
Digest Posts 0
Credits 11379
Posts 10971
Registered 2005-4-4
Location Melbourne Oz 墨尔本- 澳洲
Status
Online
Good post by China Daily
Certainly a complex issue and I comment here for two reasons.
The main one being to bump "leng mo" !
2007-11-12 07:02 PM
#19
caringhk
(O Sweetie&Me go laojia. ..)
VIP Member
UID 43704
Digest Posts 0
Credits 43927
Posts 41388
Registered 2004-11-3
Location JiangXi-Ma6Jia Twins!!!
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
emucentral
at 2007-11-12 19:02
Certainly a complex issue and I comment here for two reasons.
The main one being to bump "leng mo" !
So u(aus) wanna take over China's greatest???
2007-11-14 03:13 PM
#20
21
1/2
1
2
>
Printable Version
|
Email to Friend
|
Subscription
|
Favorites
Forum Rules
Feedback
Privacy
Copyright By chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved
