|
China TWO CHILD POLICY? (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Slylee |
no i was talking about how china values males more than females...so much that couples actually kill their own baby girls and try to have another boy because of the regulations on how many kids they can have.
and your ing mom is an idiot. fag. :o |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
no i was talking about how china values males more than females...so much that couples actually kill their own baby girls and try to have another boy because of the regulations on how many kids they can have.
and your ing mom is an idiot. fag. :o |
My aunt is from China, and when I first met her, I actually discussed this topic with her pretty in depth. Totally true, and not only that, but having a second child, while TECHNICALLY permitted if you get the okay, is basically only afforded to people with money. |
|
|
| Adam420 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Slylee
no i was talking about how china values males more than females...so much that couples actually kill their own baby girls and try to have another boy because of the regulations on how many kids they can have.
and your ing mom is an idiot. fag. :o |
I agree, she is pretty dumb.
Anyway sorry, I didn't realize what you were referring to. Yes you're right, I think it's because many believe that a male has a greater chance of making it through in life and support his parents at the same time. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Adam420
I agree, she is pretty dumb.
Anyway sorry, I didn't realize what you were referring to. Yes you're right, I think it's because many believe that a male has a greater chance of making it through in life and support his parents at the same time. |
It has to do with supporting the family. |
|
|
| R!CH |
| who cares? i used to give a about war, disease, famine, and other such tragedies thinking there was some kind of idealistic solution to it all, but now i'm a bit more realistic about it and in the context of the population problem not opposed to any of it. we need to return to an age of survival of the fittest by tearing down all the social safety nets that allow the idiots to breed large families and survive to old age--where in a country like america half of the population doesn't even know that an electron is smaller than an atom and where a full two-thirds don't believe that all life today followed an evolutionary path. the less stupid people around, the better life will be for every other living thing on the planet. that's what people should be concerned with. if china is having trouble finding women to breed, is that really a problem? also this idea that everyone in china kills their daughter for hope of a son is a akin to the idea that everyone in america s their cousins. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by [N]ûk|êû[Z]
and who'd have thought it was all down to one man...
..... ? |
Wait, pkc is blonde! :p |
|
|
| saluyamo |
| quote: | Originally posted by R!CH
just because you can't identify them doesn't mean they don't exist or that their existence is even in question. take for example the the rise of the middle class in china, india and other exploding developing countries. hundreds of millions of people are now living with disposable income, developing a taste for american-style mass consumption including luxuries of obsolescence such as fashion, cars, suburban living, red meat diets, etc... all these behaviors increase waste, mining for resources, production of raw materials, manufacturing of disposable goods, habitat destruction, overfishing, not to mention the amount of food energy used to bring every pound of meat product to market. |
You said it yourself, the problem is these people in developing countries want everything we have, not that there is overpopulation |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
It's still very poor policy. China's future demographic problems will dwarf its overpopulation issue. Imagine a society in which 1/2 of all members are dependents (mostly seniors).
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/...toryId=89572563 |
I don't agree; continuous population growth is not a sustainable strategy over the long term, and any demographic problems will only be greater in a larger population.
I think calling the problem demographic is a mischaracterization, though. The problem is that the old paradigm of the relatively few elderly being supported by the relatively many young cannot be sustained indefinitely and must be replaced sooner or later. The transition will be far from painless in any case, but it would be more painful in an even larger population, so I would advise getting it over with. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
I don't agree; continuous population growth is not a sustainable strategy over the long term, and any demographic problems will only be greater in a larger population.
I think calling the problem demographic is a mischaracterization, though. The problem is that the old paradigm of the relatively few elderly being supported by the relatively many young cannot be sustained indefinitely and must be replaced sooner or later. The transition will be far from painless in any case, but it would be more painful in an even larger population, so I would advise getting it over with. |
Well said; I tend to agree.
I think that in a way, that shift is already in progress. It was only fifty years ago that families of five and six children were commonplace in Western countries, whereas now they are relatively rare. In medieval times, families were even larger - firstly due to lack of contraception and high infant death rates (i.e more children born to compensate), but also because parents relied on their children to support them in later life. The more children one had, the greater their financial success in old age.
Contrast that to contemporary times, where people either work until much later in life or invest 'for their future' sometimes actually passing their wealth on to their children, and it becomes apparent that if this trend continues, the conventional model of 'few elderly, many youth' may actually change. |
|
|
| AnotherWay83 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Meat187
Step in the wrong direction. Most countries should have the one child policy and strictly enforce it. The planet is already overpopulated and this will just get worse. |
|
|
|
| R!CH |
| quote: | Originally posted by saluyamo
You said it yourself, the problem is these people in developing countries want everything we have, not that there is overpopulation |
quite the opposite. i said overpopulation is the heart of the problem. a number of ecologists have calculated that using current food crop technology, an earth in balance with stability for all species would have somewhere between 2-2.5 billion people. i added that the american-style mass consumption we're seeing from a growing number of newly middle-class people around the developing world is compounding the effects of the population problem, ie: resource depletion, habitat destruction, mass wasting, pollution, environmental degradation, etc. |
|
|
| R!CH |
most people don't realize the scale of waste the industrialized world produces. every week we put our garbage on the street for pickup and never think twice about where it goes or how much of it we account for individually every year. here's an idea...
http://www.storyofstuff.com/
http://matadorchange.com/intolerabl...ss-consumption/
and yet every day, more and more people begin living like us, and every day more and more people are being born into this way of life. within our lifetime we'll see the tipping point of it all. |
|
|
|
|
