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

China allows couples to have three children

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 339 posts

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#11

Post by throw0101a »

There is some question on whether the one-child policy was even needed. If you look at a graph of "children per mother" chart before and after the original policy went into effect, it's quite evident that rates were dropping for more than a decade beforehand:

* https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/october/china...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Birth_rate_in_China.svg

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

Industrialization, urbanization, reduction in child mortality, and the education of women accomplished a reduction in the rate in China just like it did/does just about everywhere else.

The ghastly human rights violations that led from the policy were completely unnecessary.

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#12

Post by amelius »

axiosgunnar wrote: post #4
ginko wrote: post #2

It feels strange to me why they're not just getting rid of the limit at this point. Especially since they already seem to have trouble getting couples to have two children.

TFA talks about this, saying they fear a child number explosion in poor rural areas.

Perhaps time for better social security then.

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#14

Post by alva »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #10
hackingthenews wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could also be that they see no scenario ahead where they want the average number of children per woman to be above 3. I don't think China wants back to exponential growth ever. They probably want to find their equilibrium. Consider if something unlikely happens that completely changes the dynamic of families, e.g. a cultural shift where women stay more at home and have more babies. If the average family started ha…

> I don't think China wants back to exponential growth ever. Any policy defined in terms of "X children per couple" or "X children per woman" is, by definition, exponential growth. When X is 3, it's very rapid exponential growth.

X = 1 is not exponential growth

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#16

Post by thaumasiotes »

alva wrote: post #14
thaumasiotes wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think China wants back to exponential growth ever. Any policy defined in terms of "X children per couple" or "X children per woman" is, by definition, exponential growth. When X is 3, it's very rapid exponential growth.

X = 1 is not exponential growth

Yes, it is. Since the population is shrinking over time, it is more often called "exponential decay", but mathematically there's no difference. It just means the value of the exponent is negative.

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#17

Post by stefan_ »

throw0101a wrote: post #11

There is some question on whether the one-child policy was even needed. If you look at a graph of "children per mother" chart before and after the original policy went into effect, it's quite evident that rates were dropping for more than a decade beforehand: * https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/october/china... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Birth_rate_in_China.svg * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O…

There is another graph here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/F...

Which shows a massive male surplus particularly in the young demographics, way larger than you would biologically expect. How can we claim this policy has no effect if clearly people are still killing female infants?

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#18

Post by refurb »

hackingthenews wrote: post #7
throwaway316943 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine there’s entire departments of people dedicated to managing this program. Probably dedicated party members. I don’t think they could take their titles away and reorganize them without starting a lot of infighting.

It could also be that they see no scenario ahead where they want the average number of children per woman to be above 3. I don't think China wants back to exponential growth ever. They probably want to find their equilibrium. Consider if something unlikely happens that completely changes the dynamic of families, e.g. a cultural shift where women stay more at home and have more babies. If the average family started ha…

Considering countries who have tried to increase their birth rate have failed to even budge the number by 10%, I’m pretty sure the risk of too many births is pretty much non-existent.

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#19

Post by toxik »

stefan_ wrote: post #17
throw0101a wrote: post #11

There is some question on whether the one-child policy was even needed. If you look at a graph of "children per mother" chart before and after the original policy went into effect, it's quite evident that rates were dropping for more than a decade beforehand: * https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/october/china... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Birth_rate_in_China.svg * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O…

There is another graph here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/F... Which shows a massive male surplus particularly in the young demographics, way larger than you would biologically expect. How can we claim this policy has no effect if clearly people are still killing female infants?

The question was if it was NEEDED, not if it had any effect.

Re: China allows couples to have three children

#20

Post by throw0101a »

stefan_ wrote: post #17
throw0101a wrote: post #11

There is some question on whether the one-child policy was even needed. If you look at a graph of "children per mother" chart before and after the original policy went into effect, it's quite evident that rates were dropping for more than a decade beforehand: * https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/october/china... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Birth_rate_in_China.svg * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O…

There is another graph here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China#/media/F... Which shows a massive male surplus particularly in the young demographics, way larger than you would biologically expect. How can we claim this policy has no effect if clearly people are still killing female infants?

> How can we claim this policy has no effect if clearly people are still killing female infants?

No effect ≠ no need.

The intended purpose was to reduce birth rates for population control. This was being accomplished before the the policy even came into effect.

Post reply on HN