Allow me to be the devil's advocate here; but who or what gave you the "right" to consider it to be your decision? You're having a child in that state, which ultimately impacts on that state; so whether you chose to admit it or not, you are not the only person that matters, insofar as the state is concerned. If the state cannot afford to feed everyone, and sees its citizens having children indiscriminately, should not the state take action to prevent starvation vis a vis overpopulation? You may not consider it to be "right" but I think having food riots and starving people dropping dead in the streets is even less right. If you looked into the history of China and the effects of starvation (great leap forward) and famine; when people reportedly cooked and ate their children, you may not be so casual with such a laissez-faire outlook toward unlimited population. Historical perspectives with population demographics are deceptive and mostly unreliable as foundations to base contemporary population bases arguments. The same social circumstance no longer exist. That is to say, the things that may have had impact on population decision making 100 years ago, are completely different today (effects of diseases, food sources, allocation of national wealth, education, access to resources, et cetera). One cannot just look at simple numerical instances from history and use them as absolutes for comparative examples; without their historical context, such numbers are rather meaningless.
I don't agree w/ the one child policy, but if a country have too much people, then try considering it because it would be better for the country economically. Too much people= job less. Job Less= $$$ Decrease, and so on.
I think i'll be better if you look at the per capita values (or percent values). Luxembourg with about 1/2 million citizen will probaly always have a lower number of jobless ppl then China
It's neccessary, i think. China is simply to big as a country. The growth in percentage is the same with other countries, but absolutety, the figures are big.
haven't heard anything about modification. but in my point of veiw about the rules " one child one policy " That must feeling lonly for the child don't have any siblings that they can play or talk together. and think about the parants then! They may having thoughts about to having another child but they can't because the law over there (china). Every human has the right to do what they will, except braking the law.
that's true. A few years ago I saw a documentary about China. Alot of parants or grandparants, to a boy, went out to find a wife to they son/grandsons because China has an overpopulation of male and an underpopulation of female.
I did a case study on this policy a while back. let me point out some of the main points. Pros: - Great policy to reduce population growth - Good idea to reduce natural resource consumption - Can Provide the " one " child with many benefits in terms of education, life style and finance. Cons: - The policy is going to make the future children of china, selfish. - Most families crave for a male child in order to keep the blood line going (obvious, but i just had to point it out LOL) - Males will exceed females, thus males seeking female of other nationalities therefore the rate of half chinese / what ever will grow. - Labour will decrease therefore cost of production for foreign companies will increase. This is a serous one. Than products that we see in the will increase and so on..chain reaction if you get my drift. Overall I think it is necessary, however their are consequences. The question is, will we be prepared for it?
Ahh, shit i never look that much in to this but i have heard about this policy thought i was something long time ago.. :S And read most of the post that are posted and agrees, its necessary and a cruel way cause they wanna keep the blood line and all that! SAD TO HEAR!! :(
i'm not 100% sure if it's necessary...like how much of a difference is there between having the policy and not having it. Does it really make that much of an impact that makes it necessary? i guess there's both sides to the issue
LOL... I don't know if you ever had to raise kids before, but let me tell you this; if you have two kids instead of one, you have to feed them with twice as much food. Now imagine if the schools had to have twice as many chairs, the fields had to produce twice as much crop, the reservoirs had to hold twice as much water, and you needed twice as many job openings for when those kids grow up; et cetera, all the way down to the number of toilet seats. Now show us a way that you can realistically increase twice the resources of one of the most populated nations on the planet before you consider "Does it really make that much of an impact that makes it necessary?" Pundits are already stating that if China's national growth rate falls below 8 percent annually (because of the world economic turmoil), that there won't be enough jobs for people and the PRC may suffer social unrest. Suppose we were to add even more long term consumable need to that equation, what do you think would happen? Would China be able to ramp up production for an even better growth rate? And despite that, even if everyone was working and make tons of money, what does one do when entering a supermarket, and the shelves are empty? It would be akin to being Bill Gates, one of the richest men on the planet, being lost in the desert; all the money in the world won't help if there is simply no food to be bought. :ugh: China would face food riots & starvation. Consider what locusts do when they run out of food (answer is, they begin to eat each other, which in turn drives them to swarm). And it wouldn't be the first time that China turned to mass cannibalism. So, is this policy really necessary? Well, for China to survive as a nation? Yes. For China to devolve into anarchy, become balkanized into armed pockets controlled by warlords that in turn, control food and other consumable resources, while hundreds of millions of other Chinese starved to death? Then, no; it really isn't necessary, but I'd hold off then on that Beijing vacation.
