- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: China is in demographic trouble.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:13 am to Bjorn Cyborg
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:13 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
The one-child policy only ended in 2016, despite evidence for decades that it was going to cause major issues. It was replaced by a two-child policy. That changed to a three-child policy in 2021. Later in 2021, that removed all limits, and now incentivize child birth. So, you tell me.
So they basically became….normal.
Ok?
They still arent massively importing labor etc. doesn’t sound like a “crisis”
1
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:13 am to wackatimesthree
I have read some great articles on how China actually enacted a TPA (Targeted Poverty Alleviation) program that was greatly responsible for the GDP per capita going from ~$1000 to ~$13,000 per year in only a few decades. Their pivot to ‘state capitalism’ from ‘pure’ communism can be attributed in great part to Deng Xiaoping. Their consumption tax ideas along with other reforms raised them out of 3rd world status to a ‘middle tier’ status in only a few decades. Some analysts consider this one of the greatest economic revolutions in modern history.
China is still assho though.
China is still assho though.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:18 am to TrueTiger
I've said this before here but the population of China is likely no where near what they claim.
The one child policy started in 1980.
The population was 987 million at the time.
for the population to grow, a family has to have at least 3 children to replace the parents.
In 1990 they claim it was 1.13 billion.
In 2000 they claim it was 1.295 billion
In 2010 they claim it was 1.37 billion
In 2020 they claim it was 1.4 billion
During the one child policy, families would discard girls therefore the number of men that are able to marry drops significantly.
If a family only has one child, how did the population grow by 400 million?
It didn't happen.
The chinese population is likely well under 1 billion and may be under 500 million and its in serious trouble.
The one child policy started in 1980.
The population was 987 million at the time.
for the population to grow, a family has to have at least 3 children to replace the parents.
In 1990 they claim it was 1.13 billion.
In 2000 they claim it was 1.295 billion
In 2010 they claim it was 1.37 billion
In 2020 they claim it was 1.4 billion
During the one child policy, families would discard girls therefore the number of men that are able to marry drops significantly.
If a family only has one child, how did the population grow by 400 million?
It didn't happen.
The chinese population is likely well under 1 billion and may be under 500 million and its in serious trouble.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:24 am to tigeraddict
quote:Deng Xiaoping enacted great economic reforms, but laid this egg by listening to a Chinese mathematician who was a Club of Rome groupie. Their population decline is due (in great part) to the ideas of a ‘think tank’.
Who would of thought....government trying to fix something (One child policy) and people reacting differently then expected (aborting female pregnancies because culturally, a male child takes care of his parents and has more opportunities in china)
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:26 am to bbvdd
Were they lying in 1950 or are they lying now?
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:32 am to TrueTiger
quote:
ere they lying in 1950 or are they lying now?
Probably lying since around 1990.
If they aren't lying, how did the population grow exponentially with a one child policy??
Think about it, to grow by that much every family would have to have at least 3 children and no one die in that 40 years.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:34 am to bbvdd
I asked because every mathematical projection depends on the baseline.
I don’t know if anyone really knows what an accurate number for the baseline is.
I don’t know if anyone really knows what an accurate number for the baseline is.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:36 am to bbvdd
quote:The specific policy lasted until 2016 (went from one to two to three) and was totally abandoned a few years later. Statistics vary, but it is estimated that the net loss of potential child-bearing females is >80 million. Insanity.
During the one child policy, families would discard girls therefore the number of men that are able to marry drops significantly.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:38 am to TrueTiger
Same for Korea, Japan and a lot of the West. The future of the world demographically is going to be very different going forward.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:39 am to Pezzo
quote:
lets send them some of our cultural enrichment and diversity. we can start with the Muslims.
That didn't work out well for the ones that were already there.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:41 am to teke184
The one child rule only shifted the male to females from 50.5 % female to 49% female
IOW it’s not that
IOW it’s not that
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:42 am to TrueTiger
quote:
asked because every mathematical projection depends on the baseline.
I don’t know if anyone really knows what an accurate number for the baseline is.
This is true, in the 40s and 50s, China was a 3rd world and very rural country. I would suspect that the census workers did not go out to villages and take census. The infrastructure in China at that time likely wouldn't support that.
They probably have been making shite up for 70-80 yrs.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 11:29 am
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:43 am to UtahCajun
quote:
Has China ever been a true world power? Ever? In its entire history? They have repeatedly gotten their arse handed to them by lesser populaces.
True. Imperial Japan used to kick their arse pretty bad
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:45 am to TrueTiger
They need to step up their raids into North Korea to steal women.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:48 am to TrueTiger
Maybe Gyna should take all the third world immigrants then.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 10:52 am to UtahCajun
quote:Yep. We're 26 years into the supposed "Chinese century" and they are staring in the face of a horrible time bomb - and already behind on AI.
Yet they are still the big boogieman for many here
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:05 am to Big Scrub TX
Wait until people figure out that the US and nearly every nation on earth is in the same situation to different degrees.
The people with real wealth and power have consistently said we have too many people..
The people with real wealth and power have consistently said we have too many people..
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:12 am to Nosevens
quote:
Being that they have a huge amount of poor population that China considers a negative economic impact then dropping their population is a net positive thing for years to come
That was the idea behind the one child policy. They regret it now.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:16 am to Nosevens
quote:
People see this and think that it’s a bad thing for China. Being that they have a huge amount of poor population that China considers a negative economic impact then dropping their population is a net positive thing for years to come
This is where I am at, along with pollution and an overcrowded populace this doesn’t seem like an awful thing for them
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:25 am to Penrod
If you look at it as an inventory issue
, which we know already that China doesn’t respect the human life, then reducing inventory costs for a period has a beneficial bottom line effect. In China’s case they are spending money worldwide looking for ways to own countries supplies and production. The money they don’t need to spend on a poverty stricken region also allows for bigger better cities and surrounding communities. There vast slave driven workforce is there economic benefit . There is politicians here as well as business leaders that think China is a good example for future America. Those are the people who continue to separate the country
, which we know already that China doesn’t respect the human life, then reducing inventory costs for a period has a beneficial bottom line effect. In China’s case they are spending money worldwide looking for ways to own countries supplies and production. The money they don’t need to spend on a poverty stricken region also allows for bigger better cities and surrounding communities. There vast slave driven workforce is there economic benefit . There is politicians here as well as business leaders that think China is a good example for future America. Those are the people who continue to separate the country
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News