China to begin two-child policy • Hacker News Board

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#281

Post by Dirlewanger » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:17 PM UTC

paublyrne wrote: post #7

This has been expected for a while. Hopefully it can help address the increasing gender imbalance. It has reached 6:5 male to female births, resulting in huge numbers of Chinese men who cannot find marriage partners.

My very basic understanding of it was that boys were preferred since they were able to help out in the fields and as a result, girl babies were killed. I wonder if it would just continue since this means 2 able bodies vs. 1? I feel like some state-sanctioned benefits would need to be put into place for the rural populations to prefer raising girls. A 1.2 male-to-female ratio is an appalling metric for a country.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#282

Post by 5h » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:23 PM UTC

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #257

erispoe wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is there too many people in China? What is the standard to determine the right population?

The problem isn't really population per se, it's population growth. China instituted the one-child policy so they could slow down their population growth to more manageable levels. We could have 10 billion people on this planet and we'd be fine, so long as we were resource-efficient.

Lots of people alive now will likely live on a 10 billion person earth

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=world+population+1900+t...

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#283

Post by nickbauman » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:37 PM UTC

superuser2 wrote: post #255

erispoe wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is there too many people in China? What is the standard to determine the right population?

Ecosystems have carrying capacities. There is only so much water and arable land. There are only so many resources in the mines/oil wells waiting to be extracted. Technology (like GMOs) can help you make incrementally more efficient use of those resources, but not as fast as unbounded exponential population growth. At some point, the average standard of living has to come crashing down. The biologically necessary qua…

Arguably 1/2 of the molecules in our bodies come from the artificial nitrogen extraction process developed during WWI. Without that, Earth's human population would have been limited to half of what it is now back in the 20th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Haber_process

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#284

Post by hodwik » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:44 PM UTC

saryant wrote: post #172

hodwik wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case they're not totalitarian though. China is a Republic, it's just a Republic with a taller pyramid than our own. You elect district leaders, who elect state leaders and the congress, and they elect the president and prime minister. Technically, that's roughly the same system we have here with the electoral congress and faithless electors. The difference is that in the US, faithless electors are much less c…

> You elect district leaders ...from a list of candidates approved by the Communist Party.

Which actually means you have more choice.

In the US you generally get one Democrat and one Republican.

When you have only one party, it's as though you have no parties, you get to elect from many different candidates.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#285

Post by clock_tower » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:46 PM UTC

funkyy wrote: post #128

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.

China managed to succeed in increasing people wealth and loosening laws (still bad for Western standards, but huge step comparing to China 30 years ago). Only because West thinks this is "brutal and cruel" dosent mean our laws would ever worked there. Some tried giving Arab countries democracy and it turned out they never really wanted it and most of the dictators were much better alternative (still bad, just better…

These are two different issues -- democracy and human rights. There's nothing wrong with having a king, for example; but there's something very wrong with state-mandated infanticide -- and it would be just as wrong if it was imposed by a democracy as by any other form of government.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#286

Post by mahyarm » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:48 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #227

throwaway_789 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be eugenics. The how-to gusto and historical tone-deafness of three commenters in this chain are flabbergasting.

I don't know what exactly you replied to, but the entire category of 'eugenics' should not be tainted forever. Heritably curing the cystic fibrosis gene with an injection? That's eugenics.

That is direct genetic manipulation. Eugenics is, in many people's mind, limiting people's reproduction to breed them like they were pets.

One is unfocused and hard to target genetic manipulation via reproduction incentives and force, the other is a choice for very targeted and obvious things.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#287

Post by electricblue » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:48 PM UTC

joeclark77 wrote: post #261

electricblue wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Mass sterilization of financially desperate young men. What could possibly go wrong?

Less people needing welfare? I'm sorry, can't think of anything atm.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#288

Post by chaitanya » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:51 PM UTC

So many people here with really outdated ideas about what causes over population and how to control it. Wish they would read this article by Melinda Gates on some myths around this subject: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/Resources-and-Medi...

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#289

Post by beachstartup » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:51 PM UTC

erispoe wrote: post #248

vinceyuan wrote: post #244

One-child policy began in 1979. In 1980, My mother hid in her relatives' houses and finally delivered her second child - me. I was very lucky because if my mother was caught, I can't sit here to type these sentences. I do understand the one-child policy because there are too many people in China, especially in cities. The population should be under control. (However, as far as I know, one-child policy never really wo…

Why is there too many people in China? What is the standard to determine the right population?

> What is the standard to determine the right population

only someone who's never been to china would ask about the 'standard' for determining overpopulation. it's abundantly clear as soon as you step off the airplane and take a look around. it's just too damn crowded.

what is the standard for determining that water is wet?

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#290

Post by code4life » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 6:52 PM UTC

fsloth wrote: post #270

code4life wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our founders did that hard work for us. The Bill of Rights and the constitution explain what freedoms we are granted and as well why we are granted them (inalienable rights from our Creator). Previously throughout history, rights were granted to people from their government, through laws. These concepts were flipped upside down, and if you study why, you'll see the reason is Biblical principles. All you have to do is…

"My personal feeling is that between 1900 and say now, Americans are more willing to reject the reasoning that gave it freedom to accept the reasoning that will take it away." I can give several counterexamples to that claim. Racial segregation "ended" in the United States in 1964. I would claim the country was - at least from a legislative standpoint - more free after than before it. So starting from 1900 I would cl…

I appreciate that point of view.

I would state that the behavior occurring was already unconstitutional, as we are all created equal and we all have equal rights. This was a founding principle.

The question is, do you have equal rights on my private property? The law says yes. It's disappointing we need a law to get us that far. We had to give up individual liberty, by allowing laws to move into our personal lives, in order to give equal rights to others?

I don't respect people of other nationalities because there is a law to do so. What new impact did the law have on people's hearts? What impact does the Bible have on a persons heart when it says to "love thy neighbor like thyself".

Even with the Civil Rights acts, we have a heightened sense of urgency in the united states, where the media reports violence between white and black people frequently. A new law won't stop this, but a change of heart just might.