China's New Three-Child Policy
China has run through years of trying to "engineer" the number of children per couple to fit into its quest for a nation-wide improvement in its standard of living.
Starting back a few decades ago it established on one child policy. The idea was smart in economic terms. The country was spending gigantic sums on schools and child care. Women in rural areas were needed in cities to work in factories. They could not do this if they spent 30 years of their lives pregnant or caring for children.
Large families also drained the government. Money spent on schools was money not available for new technology. The one child rule was very successful measured against the goal of the policy, economic growth. While that are many variables involved it is undeniable the one child policy was part of what leap frogged China's urban standard of living upwards.
No doubt planners and economists knew the policy would be difficult to sustain. There were complaints from the public. Then there was a need for more labor. Perhaps somewhat unpredicted was the increase in lifespan of older adults. Older people use up resources in a way similar to children. They need a labor force and buildings to take care of them. So China's one child policy hit the country in two ways, a smaller pipeline of people entering the labor force and more labor needed for an aging population. The one child policy was replaced with a two child policy. Now it has been changed to three children.
It is not at all apparent the three child policy will increase dramatically the number of babies born, however. China watchers say the vast rural to urban migration and opportunities for women has reduced the number of children couples wish to have. Population numbers may not change very much.
And, if the numbers of babies did rise dramatically, the old problem that existed before the one child policy would again raise its head. The need for schools, teachers and day care would increase and take resources away from other needs just as it did decades ago.
Children have changed from what they were when my parents were born. They were productive inputs to farms and villages. They more than paid their own why by their 18th birthday. I suppose a few years after I was born children became consumer goods competing with TV sets and cars. They also competed for national resources.
That is why China's three child policy may not produce many more children.
The situation in China forty years ago was far more dire. If China had continued on its population explosion as it had previous to the 1980s, they would be having mass famine events today.
ReplyDeleteThey needed to change the culture, and they did.
China's one-child law was my first exposure to how ridiculous political discussion can become. Yes, mandatory abortions were part of that policy, but if they hadn't enacted that policy, we would likely be looking at the unnecessary deaths of hundreds of millions of people today. To me, it was a no brainer. They didn't have a choice in the matter, and I was quite surprised when I learned how controversial it was at the time.
Bryan K -- "...when I learned it was controversial at the time." Leaders of the masses of people in China toughed the one child policy and, as you point out, prevented large scale food shortages, probably deaths. I understand China a mostly not religious so the society did not have to hear what we are subjected to, "The Lord will provide." The "Lord" has not provided and will not provide. As George Carlin said, "Religion is the biggest con job ever invented." When you think about the con job presented here by commenters, the fertilized cell is a human being, invisible gods, life after death, the Lord will provide..one has to admit our commenters are good con artists like the rest of Christianity.
DeleteChina will need all the numbers they can get with their stated aspirations.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.newsweek.com/china-state-media-says-country-must-prepare-nuclear-war-us-after-biden-asks-covid-probe-1596568
China also cannot get enough raw materials.
https://news.usni.org/2020/09/01/pentagon-report-china-now-has-worlds-largest-navy-as-beijing-expands-military-influence
We have seen this all before with their domesticated neighbor, while we were sleeping off the night before. Yawnnnnn........ Happy belated Memorial Day.
Henry--China sounds just like a former President, "Make America Great Again." That President was mostly unsuccessful. I've read Biden often observes that the countries which make popular villains in our press and DC are run by "Politicians like us." China does not have unlimited money, more limited than us, but has enough to put up a bluff. Russia was the same. It was always a poor place but it served political purposes of U.S. politics to present it as a threat. In the middle of the cold war I remember Senator Dorgan musing, "We have six times the military might of Russia. I don't think we need more than that." This was when Republicans in DC were screaming about the threat Russia posed.
DeleteNow that is a scary thought, a thread of "wisdom" (particularly concerning military stategery) pulled from Dorgon. What an embarrassment we had back then for the rest of flyover country. We had Doorknob and Conjob. What a team. Their unsuccessful efforts after squandering billions on digging a ditch to nowwhere is a good memorial.
DeleteI always got a kick out of their frugal living in ND.
https://www.bismarckmandanblog.com/?p=692
When they came home for Christmas, I could just envision them cooking the bone-in prime rib with that green stove. I am sure they splurged every once in a while.