Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China to begin two-child policy

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 455 posts

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#81

Post by arbitrage »

jazzyk wrote: post #64
ZenoArrow wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "If so, I totally support the idea of licensing human breeding." That sort of licensing is ripe for abuse. What would happen if someone in power took that license away from you just because they didn't agree with your political views?

Not just political views. Most people would agree that mentally ill people should not have children. But what constitutes mentally ill? The line is fuzzy - perhaps someone is just a bit "quirky", but still could be a good parent? In order to have a license the criteria would have to be crystal clear and added to the Constitution (sorry, US-centric). And even if in the Constitution, someone could abuse it (see: NSA, s…

> Most people would agree that mentally ill people should not have children.

It is vastly oversimplifying, and prejudicial, to say something like that.

Many more people than you seem to think have experienced, or will experience mental illness in their life.

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/any-men...

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#82

Post by throwaway_789 »

sugarcube wrote: post #32
laichzeit0 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like the problem of telling people they can't just drive cars or own firearms and need to meet some competence criteria first, i.e. licensing? If so, I totally support the idea of licensing human breeding.

Unfortunately, that quickly leads into fashist territory (eugenics)...

That wouldn't lead to eugenics, it would very much already be eugenics.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#83

Post by hvs »

rubidium wrote: post #76
sethbannon wrote: post #56

From the article "All couples will now be allowed to have two children". So it seems China isn't so much ending its one-child policy, as augmenting it by one to a two-child policy. This means the brutal and cruel enforcement will continue, only it will kick in at the third child instead of at the second.

The most disgusting thing about the policy is that the citizens let the state have that much power. It's a terrible thing to let economic concerns so dominant the public arena and politics that people let the gov't decide how many kids they have.

It's a communist gov't. The people "letting the gov't decide" has little do with it.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#84

Post by bilbo0s »

electricblue wrote: post #58
r-w wrote: post #36

The Giver ’s portrayal of systematic euthanasia of the elderly comes to mind. I really hope we never have to make that kind of decision. After all, what choice could possibly be compatible with our principles of liberty, equality, respect, and fairness? This may be the hardest ethical problem we can’t afford not to solve.

Seems fairly easy to me. Pay 18 year old boys $10k to get a vasectomy. Watch birth rates plummet. Captialism gives us systematic inequality, we should use it to fix more problems

???

That's not the way you control birth rates.

You control birth rates by controlling FEMALE fertility... not male fertility.

There are mathematical reasons behind this, but for the purposes of simplicity I'll give the lay explanation. ie - A female can only have one (or so) child every 9 months. A single human male can produce one every day. So having a population with only one male, but 100 females, allows for a FAR higher reproduction rate than a population with 100 males, but only one female.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#85

Post by kalleboo »

adrianN wrote: post #42
kirsebaer wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you going to force women to abort "unlicensed" children? Force women to have birth control implants? Up until the 1990s in Spain, many thousands of children were systematically stolen from political activists and others with the wrong politics or wrong lifestyle. Parents were told that their newborn had died. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15335899

A less severe form would be financial incentives for licensed parents. You're still free to have children if you want, but you're only supported by the state if you got a license. Pair this with free birth control implants and abortions for everyone who wants them and you get most of the effect without the use of force. You could even pay men to get a vasectomy.

> You're still free to have children if you want, but you're only supported by the state if you got a license

This will only mean the most vulnerable (who need the most support) will be unsupported. You're creating an underclass.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#86

Post by brlewis »

tremon wrote: post #62
MC7447a wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overpopulation is a non-problem. Fertility has fallow to near- or below-replacement rate everywhere in the world, except Afrika (which will likely follow in the next decades.) A nice talk from Hans Rosling on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eA5BM7CE5-8

You mean, it is not a problem because the planet can support that many? Or do you mean it is a problem, but it will solve itself? I don't think either is correct. The first is only true today because non-First World inhabitants are living on a much smaller ecological footprint than Europe and the US. However, that footprint is increasing rapidly. The second reading at least acknowledges there is a problem, but I thin…

What are the "modest levels of first-world consumption" in the estimates you mention? And how recent are these estimates? There are many factors that likely will contribute to a smaller first-world footprint, e.g. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-will-burn-less...

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#87

Post by sahreeg »

vincentkriek wrote: post #74
sethbannon wrote: post #56

From the article "All couples will now be allowed to have two children". So it seems China isn't so much ending its one-child policy, as augmenting it by one to a two-child policy. This means the brutal and cruel enforcement will continue, only it will kick in at the third child instead of at the second.

Brutal and cruel? I agree it's a severe limit on the personal freedom but China doesn't value personal freedom as highly as the west does. Brutal and cruel is not the right terms for this in my opinion, you can have a beautiful, rich and fullfilling life with 2 children or less. You can plan to have just two children (up to some point). Also, I think it could benefit the earth if more countries would limit children.

I completely agree with you. In terms of population alone, we are exceedingly multiplying; something that might not be of out best advantage. More even when you consider that there will be less opportunities for an increasing number of people, and we will lose this personal freedom you spoke of -to an extent-

I am also pro child limit laws. I would suggest nothing too strict, just impose a tax on the third child and up. We know from psychology that little restrictions and the mere fact of a 'cost' would reduce the intrinsic desire of people to even take an action, in this case child bearing. Furthermore, I think a tax is a not an extreme measure, considering the fact that you would still be allowed to have children if you want. But do keep in mind that the poorest, less educated are often the ones to have plenty of children, which ends up harming the family, this might be good for them.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#88

Post by goodcanadian »

catshirt wrote: post #29
goodcanadian wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Due to already declining birth rates, human population is expected to peak around 11 billion people in approximately 2100.[1] I will grant that the error bars are quite large, and that there is no certainty that the planet can handle even that number, but it bothers me that there are still people that seem to believe in Malthusian exponential growth. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

your source doesn't support your claim at all... > "increase to 11.2 billion in the year 2100" > "may rise to 16 billion by 2100" > "forecasts between 9.3 and 12.6 billion in 2100, and continued growth thereafter " > "World population to hit 11bn in 2100 – with 70% chance of continuous rise "

I was using the middle model. The lower model shows a peak of 8-9 billion in about 2050. The upper model shows continued growth past 2011. Hence, "large error bars." Anyway, I agree it is not the best source, but I didn't want to leave my claim completely without citation. If you investigate a bit, I think you'll find that my claim is consistent with UN estimates.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#89

Post by Blackthorn »

Keyframe wrote: post #72

Are there any psychology/sociology studies how one-child policy impacted China's society? It has been documented how having one child vs siblings impact one's psyche. I wonder what kind of impact it has on a culture/society as a whole if most are from single-child families.

Well, we definitely know that the policy combined with the already-existing culture resulted in a massive gender gap. Not sure of any studies beyond that, I too would be interested!
Post reply on HN