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

China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 666 posts

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#491

Post by pjc50 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #467
selfmodruntime wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to glaze unelected uniparty governments, but this is what you can actually achieve if you don't have to focus on your new election the moment you enter office.

This. Also, China has always taken the long view, and has, historically, leveraged experience. I’m no expert in their culture, and am rather worried about their influence, but I can’t but admire their incredible strategic vision. Also, as a retiree, I’m rather saddened by some of the discussions, here.

A lot of the retirees vs young discourse (and, tbh, wider politics) is just mirroring the conflict people have with their own parents or children. Especially the "why don't you just" for getting a job/a house/a partner, without acknowledging the very different conditions prevailing.

(sometimes it materializes more directly, in things like NIMBY planning conflicts or homophobia)

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#492

Post by Dumblydorr »

shubhamjain wrote: post #333
yanhangyhy wrote: post #233

I don’t know how it is in other countries, but nearly thirty years ago when I was in elementary school, a Chinese propaganda slogan stuck with me: “If you want to get rich, build roads first; have fewer children, plant more trees.” Every part of that slogan has been put into action, continuously, for decades. Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. Xi Jinping may be a…

> Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. They haven't, imo. I am from India, and I have been hearing for the last two decades how we have avoided same mistakes as China and the latter is headed for a demographic collapse. China is only marching forward, and focusing more on automation to hedge its bets. While overpopulation in India has choked almost every city in Ind…

An inverted population pyramid is a huge problem. What does China do when it has far too few workers and far too many elderly? This is coming for them in the next few decades, a slow moving crisis in demographics.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#493

Post by yanhangyhy »

voidUpdate wrote: post #488
yanhangyhy wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false information. Gender transition is legal in China. There are many cases on Chinese social media. We even have a celebrity who is transgender. On Chinese internet there is even a joke. Because women retire earlier than men in China, people discuss whether they can exploit a loophole by changing their legal gender to female in the year before the female retirement age to retire earlier.

I'm sorry, I got my information from The Economist, which says that you have to be unmarried, heterosexual and get permission from your family to change your gender, and you have to have surgery before you are recognised

In China, the process requires passing a strict psychological evaluation and surgery before one can change their legal identity and be recognized by the state. Since I used to be know some people from the community, so I have some understanding. I don’t know the policies of other countries, but for those who truly want to transition, I think this is necessary. The requirement to be unmarried is reasonable, since China does not recognize same-sex marriage. I’m not entirely sure about the family consent requirement, but China has the household registration system (hukou), which records family members, so it seems somewhat reasonable. As for being heterosexual, I don’t think that should be a standard requirement, since the main requirements are the hospital’s psychological evaluation and surgery. At least I know of many cases where people successfully changed their legal identity. Of course, these requirements might seem a bit strict in other countries.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#494

Post by coldtea »

tossandthrow wrote: post #465
coldtea wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From me what you mention seems to be derivative of the retirement argument where you clearly state that those not being able to work as much and have higher maintainance needs are the ones at disadvantage. I state the opposite: the younger people, who are being able to work as much, are the ones at a disadvantage. That's regardless if the older people live off their wealth, have state services redistributed to them…

This is simply not correct. The "the young people have to work more" argument is only valid as they are working for the older generation. If we follow your proposal to euthanize every one over 60 then there really is no additional work.

>The "the young people have to work more" argument is only valid as they are working for the older generation.

Nope, that's just a tiny part of the problem.

An economy has a certain size, which depends on how many people support it (work) and how many people buy stuff (consume).

Fewer young people means (everything else being equal) less productivity. That's regardless if the old people are kept around or euthanized (!) or whatever.

Seems you forgot that declining fertility also means less young people each year, not just a larger percentage of older people. Even if you ...kill anybody above 40 years old, the number of 20 and 30 year olds will still drop because of the declining fertility.

Smaller worker and consumer base then means contracting economy.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#495

Post by tsimionescu »

coldtea wrote: post #426
tossandthrow wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main issue with a demographic decline is that fewer people can live of their wealth. This is in particular a problem for the older generation. But if you are not a big believer in retirement, then there are no issues with demographic shifts.

There are MANY issues with a demographic decline, "that fewer people can live of their wealth" is the least of it. Less productive hands (60 year olds are not as productive as 20 and 30 year olds, especially in any industrial and labor intensive field, but also in intellectual ones - who would have thought?). More older people in need of health support. Less dynamic society. Slowing economy. Beyond some (not very low…

If the population is declining, it's not a problem that the economy is also shrinking, assuming the rates are equal. What matters is GDP per capita not decreasing, it doesn't matter if total GDP decreases because the population shrinks.

The only real issue is the demographic shift - and old people will bear the brunt of that, not younger ones.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#496

Post by yanhangyhy »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #492
shubhamjain wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. They haven't, imo. I am from India, and I have been hearing for the last two decades how we have avoided same mistakes as China and the latter is headed for a demographic collapse. China is only marching forward, and focusing more on automation to hedge its bets. While overpopulation in India has choked almost every city in Ind…

An inverted population pyramid is a huge problem. What does China do when it has far too few workers and far too many elderly? This is coming for them in the next few decades, a slow moving crisis in demographics.

robots

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#498

Post by globular-toast »

simsla wrote: post #466
shubhamjain wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. They haven't, imo. I am from India, and I have been hearing for the last two decades how we have avoided same mistakes as China and the latter is headed for a demographic collapse. China is only marching forward, and focusing more on automation to hedge its bets. While overpopulation in India has choked almost every city in Ind…

European here. One of the problems is that many of our society's systems are predicated on a growing population. Social security and pensions, for example, are structured not unlike a pyramid scheme: for every old person we should have more than one working young person. People take more than they give. Fixing that will be painful, but possible. More worrying is how many countries' birth rates have fallen below the r…

We are already seeing the effects of this. Rich people still get to take more than they give, poor people increasingly do not.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#499

Post by SapporoChris »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #492
shubhamjain wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. They haven't, imo. I am from India, and I have been hearing for the last two decades how we have avoided same mistakes as China and the latter is headed for a demographic collapse. China is only marching forward, and focusing more on automation to hedge its bets. While overpopulation in India has choked almost every city in Ind…

An inverted population pyramid is a huge problem. What does China do when it has far too few workers and far too many elderly? This is coming for them in the next few decades, a slow moving crisis in demographics.

Optimistically: Advancement in gerontology and improvements in problems that the elderly face.

Pessimistically: A society that doesn't support it's elderly, well it's a self correcting problem.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#500

Post by tossandthrow »

coldtea wrote: post #494
tossandthrow wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is simply not correct. The "the young people have to work more" argument is only valid as they are working for the older generation. If we follow your proposal to euthanize every one over 60 then there really is no additional work.

> The "the young people have to work more" argument is only valid as they are working for the older generation. Nope, that's just a tiny part of the problem. An economy has a certain size, which depends on how many people support it (work) and how many people buy stuff (consume). Fewer young people means (everything else being equal) less productivity. That's regardless if the old people are kept around or euthanized…

I see what the issue is - you see a contracting economy as being a problem in itself. It is not, as another commenter pointed out.
Post reply on HN