TIL China now has a 3 child policy.

Maximum, that is.

1 child policy from 1979 to 2015.

2 child policy from 2015 to 2021.

3 child policy since 2021.

The announcement came after the release of the results of the Seventh National Population Census, which showed that the number of births in mainland China in 2020 was only 12 million, the lowest number of births since 1960, and the further aging of the population, against which the policy was born.[5] This was the slowest population growth rate China experienced.[6]

Although the CCP government had high expectations for the new policy,[16] in a 2021 online poll conducted by the state media Xinhua on its Weibo account, using the hashtag #AreYouReady for the new three-child policy, about 29,000 out of 31,000 respondents stated they would “never consider it.”[15]

MissJinx,
@MissJinx@lemmy.world avatar

I have a zero child policy. It’s great!

Crackhappy,
@Crackhappy@lemmy.world avatar

Me too! My kids are gonna be pissed when they find out.

Fubarberry,
@Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz avatar

Why have a max number of kids at all? From what I hear, China desperately needs more kids.

emergencyfood,

A gradual decline in population is a good thing, so they probably don’t want to overshoot too much. Also maybe the minorities pushed for keeping some restrictions.

Fubarberry,
@Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz avatar

From what I understand, the one child policy tanked their birthrate so much that the country is expected to never recover. Current economies are basically dependent on a growing population to support the elderly and retired members of the population. Countries can somewhat get by through immigration to prop up a low birthrate, but that can only take you so far.

emergencyfood,

Current economies are basically dependent on a growing population to support the elderly and retired members of the population.

This applies only when labour is in short supply. Japan and Germany have heavily automated their industry for this reason, and China seems to be on this track.

Apart from the labour shortage, a gradually declining population is a good thing. The earth can only give us so many resources, and unless we reduce our numbers - particularly among the rich - we are headed towards extinction.

DdCno1,

Because it would meant hat the CCP would have to retreat out of this particular part of life and give up a method of control and oppression, which a totalitarian party could never do.

Duamerthrax,

It could also be seen as admitting they were wrong about the policy in the first place.

chuckleslord,

Hooray! I’m so glad, as a human, that were so comfortable with failure since it’s something we all do. And we know that we can admit when we fault and we can then do the work of righting the wrong instead of continuing going forever because we can’t be seen to have made a mistake. /s (fucking devastatingly so)

someguy3,

Yeah at the point of 3, I don’t see the point in having a max.

user224, (edited )

Maximum, that is.

Thanks for stating that first. My dumb ass was thinking how you’d enforce that as minimum…

UraniumBlazer,

“Mr. and Mrs. Xao, you have been convicted with the crime of not rawdogging hard enough. I sentence you to 2 years in the People’s Dungeon”

pound_heap,

People’s Breeding Dungeon

UraniumBlazer,

Gives a new meaning to authoritarian dick riding

morgan_423,
@morgan_423@lemmy.world avatar

The one child policy is going to end up biting them in the demographics not too far down the road.

JackGreenEarth,

Sure, we’ll have to get over that in the short term - all countries that is, not just China - but in the long term, population degrowth is actually a good thing. It means humans will be less bad for the environment, we will each have more individual worth in terms of things like voting, and more resources will be available for each individual.

classic,

Less people or less consumption. Ideally both, but one or the other will have to happen

minibyte,

I keep hearing there’s a car shortage, or housing shortage. There’s just too many of us.

partial_accumen,

It already has. Thats why its 36 years with “1 child” and only 6 years with “2 child” before it went to “3 child”, they’re deep in deficit and are trying to catch up.

Further the new “3 child” policy isn’t just a passive allowance. The government of China is actively incentivizing parents to have children.

“An extra month off and $80 monthly stipends and 30-day days of additional leave part of a series of sweetners local governments have unveiled as China kicks off the legislative process to allow married couples to have a third child in a drive to curb a precipitous decline in births.” source

mister_monster,

Incentives to have children will never, ever get you to your desired fertility rate. The problem is, if you take taxes and then give it to people that have kids, you’re subsidizing having kids at the expense of those that don’t. That means you need a large population of people not having kids to afford it, if everyone takes advantage of it then you’ll wind up just taking peoples money and giving it back to them, which puts them right back where they were before your program.

duffman, (edited )

We have always subsidized having kids over those who don’t. And honestly its the best use of our tax dollars. What do you think school is? Also, parents pay taxes before and after they raise children.

mister_monster,

I don’t know what point you’re making. Do you disagree with what I’ve said?

PhlubbaDubba,

While that’s all relatively nice, it’s also a bandage on a gash. The number one predictor of how high your country’s fertility rate will go in a developed economy is access to affordable housing, and to tackle that, Beijing is gonna have to do some serious teeth gritting on the fact that right now housing is in a serious speculative loop, several people will buy units still under construction because it’s seen as the safest way to store capital in the country, they went from a country that shot land lords to a country that’s technically chalk full of them.

CosmoNova,

While that’s all relatively nice, it’s also a bandage on a gash.

Even saying it’s “nice” is an overstatement. With how quickly savings and jobs are vanishing and how expensive and stressful it is to raise a child, the population is more opposed to the idea of having children than ever before. Affordable housing isn’t the problem. There simply aren’t enough resources available to raise a new generation. The government will have to come up with something new if they want to prevent an all out crash of their economy because there is no way in hell the few young people will be able to support the massive aging population in the coming 2 decades.

mister_monster,

Source on that claim, that affordable housing is the predictor of fertility.

shnizmuffin,
@shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol avatar

CHALK!

Chock-full.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • til@lemmy.world
  • ngwrru68w68
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Youngstown
  • everett
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • osvaldo12
  • mdbf
  • kavyap
  • cubers
  • megavids
  • modclub
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • khanakhh
  • Durango
  • ethstaker
  • tacticalgear
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • cisconetworking
  • JUstTest
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •