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

451–455 of 455 posts

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#451

Post by crdoconnor »

vlehto wrote: post #436
crdoconnor wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Royalists" have been a phenomena everywhere. As has barefaced lying to the populace about their own dislike for democracy. It seems particularly common in Egypt where the idea that "the people just aren't ready for Democracy yet like they are in the west" is commonplace among the country's elite. >It is still completely possible that spread of democracy is just multinational fashion trend. Nobody's ever voted democ…

If I would find a country where people voted out democracy, you would probably just say the election was rigged.

Only if there were evidence of vote rigging.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#452

Post by mazerackham »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #400
paradite wrote: post #216

Talk about bad things about China -> Get upvotes. Talk about good things about China -> Get downvotes and people rebutting you with clearly one-sided sources. Am I surprised? No. Am I pissed? No. I believe time will tell.

I don't know. Going through the comments, people here seem to be ahead of the curve in accepting that China may actually have had a point. But it's hard to agree with for many, because that would mean conceding that undemocratic solutions can be good and effective.

Ya I find that westerners in general have a REALLY hard time dealing with the success of China in the past 30 years, all of which springs from undemocratic policy. All media articles I read about China are ridiculously spun to grasp at straws for flaws in the government, while glossing over the tremendous good that the government has done for the people.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#453

Post by kelnos »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #314
humanrebar wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that coercive abortion and gender selection are realities and the problems of overpopulation are more theoretical, I wonder what your definition of humane is. And again, who decides which is more humane? If you and your cohort wants to stop reproducing as a good example, nobody is stopping you.

> who decides which is more humane? Your elected government? Isn't that what you elected it for? Or just hold a referendum or something. The "who decides" question is a problem here. It doesn't matter who , it only matters that the decision has to be made and then carried out. The coordination has to arise or be enforced, but happen the coordination must. What you're implying by asking this question has many names. I…

Also, the only problem with "coercive abortion" is the "coercive" part; if you believe that abortion is ok, then gender selection via abortion is also ok. If you don't believe gender selection via abortion is ok, then you also must disagree with general abortion as a practice.

Not at all. The entire point of this line of discussion centers around limiting an implied personal right to reproduce for the good of society. A one-child policy might serve society's needs as a whole. A one-child policy that allows prospective parents to, say, flood the world with a supermajority of male children does not serve society's needs.

I think that gender selection via abortion is ok in the general sense, absent perverse incentives that cause society-crippling gender imbalances, but if those incentives exist and are abused, I can certainly understand a desire to make that illegal, while still allowing (and supporting) gender-blind abortion.

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#454

Post by Jemmeh »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #373
Jemmeh wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I agree that the earth is overpopulated, I think better than taxing people is providing access to free birth control. A lot of people don't have access to it, or education about it.

Having many children is an economic issue, not access-to-birth-control issue. Poor families in third world countries will continue to mass-produce children because they can't afford not to . For the contraception to be used, we need to raise them out of poverty first.

I think lack of ability to plan when and if you have a family is a contributor to poverty in many places. Children are expensive and time consuming.

I've noticed here in the USA young girls getting pregnant and not being able to pursue higher education. I've also met some of my family in the Philippines who had many children by age 14. The husband's salary would pretty much all go to the children, and the wife would spend all day taking care of them. They are just trying to survive day to day-- little thought was given to trying to reach for anything higher.

Most people with access to birth control have children-- just when they're more ready for it. Not only does this make them more financially steady, but they are happier, and the same goes for their children.

"I find suggestive evidence that individuals’ access to contraceptives increased their children’s college completion, labor force participation, wages, and family incomes decades later." - Martha J. Bailey, an economics professor at the University of Michigan. Here's the article and link to her work. http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/09/the-long-term-effects-of-...

Re: China to begin two-child policy

#455

Post by vlehto »

crdoconnor wrote: post #451
vlehto wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I would find a country where people voted out democracy, you would probably just say the election was rigged.

Only if there were evidence of vote rigging.

There is always some kind of "evidence" for vote rigging. How about Egypt? Turkey? You don't vote Muslim brotherhood into power while thinking they maintain democracy. German federal election, March 1933, over 50% of population voted for either NSDAP or communists. And then there is Bhutan.
Post reply on HN