What will be the consequences of China's declining population? | DW News
For the first time in decades, China's population has declined, by 850,000 people according to official numbers. That doesn't sound like much for a country with a population of more than a billion. But this moment marks a trend we'll be seeing over this century. Projections show that by 2100, China's population will be lower than it was even in the 1960s. This demographic shift will have massive consequences. Not just for China, but globally. So what has China done to try to manage its population up to now and how will the country cope with the population drop?
Subscribe: kzhead.info...
For more news go to: www.dw.com/en/
Follow DW on social media:
►Facebook: / deutschewellenews
►Twitter: / dwnews
►Instagram: / dwnews
►Twitch: / dwnews_hangout
Für Videos in deutscher Sprache besuchen Sie: / dwdeutsch
#China #Population
i was on a socio economic conference in beijing in 2010. Western researchers very carefully proposed that the Chinese government should think about relaxing the one child policy because of its ageing population. they (we) gave good arguments and packaged them very friendly and carefully. Funny enough Chinese researchers answered that the government policy cant be questioned and that one child policy is very very good. One guy even recited a poem for 5 minutes in Chinese in front of 100+ people with outly half of them understanding what he is saying to defend the governments decisions. It was quite funny and sad at the same time. couple years later they changed the policy. Obviously.
Ignorance meets arrogance. Often they come in pairs and this is not only seen in china.
@@thesuperflexibleflyingtaoi8866 you just described their leader Xi.
It seems you don't know much about China...China doesn't enforce the one child policy strictly...It's very normal for Chinese families to have multiple children....
@@thesuperflexibleflyingtaoi8866 Yeah ignorance and arrogance. China never want to listen to anything from the west even if it makes perfect sense...which most of the time it probably does. Look at the zero covid thing, the whole world was saying it was ridiculous and instead of stopping it they waited an entire year and at the worst possible time they not only stopped it but went full reversal from super strict to doing nothing at all.
Xi is just as insane as Putin is
"this led to poverty and food shortages"... wait... are you sure it wasn't something else Mao did? Like give the soviet union its grain to pay off debts even during a famine? Or the utter disregard to human life? I'm not simply blaming communism like so many people do, but poor management held by those with absolute power, even high ranking CPP members had issues with what Mao was doing at that time.
many are ignorant about history, myself included. Few are willing to learn what happened long ago, it is a sad affair.
That's what I thought. Saying that the overpopulation was the cause of the famine is a huge bending the truth
Even the famine itself could be argued to have been made much worse/started due to Mao's actions, as he forced people into farming practices which were doomed to failure. It was absolutely far more complicated and tragic than just "too many people". Even if that's too much to go into due to the segment being short on time, they could have said "for this and other reasons" or something.
I was waiting for this comment, no need to beat around the bush. This is 99% Communisms fault
You have a point, backed by historical records.
As an almost 80 year old, I remember very well, stories of starvation in China, which is still a historical memory for the Chinese. Controlling the population has been a priority for them for many decades now. Yes, they are now seeing the growth issue in a completely different light, as the world economy, culture and technology have changed so dramatically. But, they have a BILLION people, and the fact that most Chinese have seen the value in having only one child, something the government forced on them by having millions and millions of abortions, mostly of girl babies, has now penetrated their culture completely. They also do not have enough women to marry the millions of men who were not aborted, their culture favoring boys over girls. So, if you are going to have only one child, preference was given to boys. If anything gives credence to the inability of big government to control large population decisions, this is it. They simply could not have foreseen the repercussions of the one child policy on the future. But, almost as important, are the millions and millions of peasants that live outside of the big cities, the landed poor, who grow the food needed to support this huge population. They also want a piece of the action in the cities, good jobs, education and income. This middle class has become all too noticeable, with the ownership of nice cars, clothes and consumerism that is very apparent in China’s urban areas. Who wouldn’t want it? So, those millions, mostly men, have flocked to the cities to work in menial jobs, mostly as laborers, who eventually find it impossible to move into the coveted middle class, find a wife, and make a success of their lives, and there are millions of them. They live poorly, in substandard housing, subsisting on meager incomes. China has done a remarkable job of just feeding its huge population. Let’s see how they manage the newest of problems, not enough people.
Well said . It's hard to get to super power status with so many self inflicted burdens.
What this video doesn’t seem to make clear is that China is by no means alone. This is a problem that almost every Western European and North American country is facing. Of course, it isn’t so apparent there because of mass immigration. However, it’s only a matter of time before immigration will also stop being a solution. The so called reproductive health mentality has taken over around the world. So every country will pretty soon be facing the same crisis. Humanity essentially committed social suicide the moment it got on board with reproductive health. There is no stopping the repercussions. China will collapse, just like every other Western country and the rest of the world.
@@28704joe It’s not that difficult to gain a super power status. In fact, a superpower status is usually gained by ignoring many of the problems and focusing on couple of aspects. China has essentially been laser focused on development for sometime now. It had ignored instilling any real moral values among its people other than a utilitarian mindset with financial success as the idol of worship. This is the end result. China will not recover because these things have momentum. Unless China decides to just forcefully breed and raise humans like animals, which will cause its own problems later on, China is going to the same way as Japan and the rest of the “developed” world.
Your brain ages as well as your body. Society is diverse, and it is also a process of survival of the fittest. Who told you that everyone must get married?
I don't think they can manage this if they never admit what they did wrong in the past. The reform won't happen.
Population decline is not unique to China. Most of the other developed Asian countries, such as Korea and Japan, are also facing the prospect of or actually encountering declining population due to low birth rates. Nor are low birth rates unique to developed countries. Brazil and even India currently have birth rates below that necessary to maintain (2.3 children per family) much less keep the population growing. It is anticipated that the world population will decline by up to 2 billion people after the middle of the century.
It's actually 2.1 to maintain the same population level. India's TFR may have fallen below that but it will swell to 1.7 B till 2062 then start declining as per studies. I guess it could peak even earlier, hope India starts the 2021 Census soon.
One word: Africa.
Japan is different. It has automated its economy and is an export market place. There may come a point that Japan starts to rebuild its population without the economic collapse that China faces.
I don't think we'll ever hit 10 billion humans, the UN's projections are far too optimistic. A lot of this decline in birth rates was when the economy was doing quite well (2010-2020), so with the coming global recession, which may be quite severe in Asia in particular, we can only expect this to fall off a cliff. I also think African birthrates, which have been most resilient to decline with urbanization, will also fall from severe famines exacerbated by climate change and sheer inability to support such a large population in places with low agricultural productivity.
Yeah... But that wasnt the point.the point was that the total number are massive in China and therefore the consequences are dire If such a country loses the same percentage as other countries.
China will be better off with a declining population. Workers there might even get treated better, as companies will have to fight for recruits.
@Angad sidemenonly India has had over a billion people for decades. Why has it not gotten all the investment? There is more required than just having a lot of people. Large populations are steam-age thinking. We have machines and robots to do work these days. India is attracting investment these days, by the way, because it has increased education and made reforms.
@angadsidemenonly1292 Already started doing that. I think they should have used two child policy instead of one child policy :P
🤣
@Angad sidemenonly India is too incompetent and lazy for manufacturing. India exports less goods than Netherlands- a tiny European country. Good for scam call centres and brainless coders . Because British gifted them Western education and English language.
@@stevens1041 That is just fantasy thinking. What will happen is that China will become very unstable economically which in turn will lead to major war and possibly WW3. Once China goes all in Russia will come to their side as they will be on the same boat.
According to researcher Yi Fuxian and leaked CCP documents, China has overestimated its population for decades. It's actual population is probably 130 million fewer than official numbers. That means India surpassed it several years ago and that its population began to shrink in the mid-2010s.
You do know these numbers take that into account otherwise the shrinking would happen a decade later
We will never know what India's population is though. The government skipped this decade's census. So there will be a full 2 decade gap when the numbers come. With rising infertility (thanks to toxins everywhere - air, water, food), i guess it will be a huge surprise when India's numbers finally come
@@paranoah1925 as it should! Every Indian I know complains about the overcrowded places and overpopulation, and POLUTION due to too many people on too little space🤢
@@NoctLightCloud only in towns and cities.
@@NoctLightCloud Indians will migrate to China.
Nice to see you in the studio Fabian!
Thank you for such eye opening regarding social trends!#
Add to that their preference of having a boy rather than a girl resulted to a large surplus of bachelors.
This might result in war, as China would like to get rid of those men without prospects of marriage to maintain social order
A lot of Russian widows.
@@susanwestern6434 there we go, problem solved. 😂
Yep there are many factors that make China's situation the worst of all.
@Blue on blue from 2030s until CCP falls or changes it’s revolting ways there is no doubt in my mind suicide rate in middle aged men will have a dramatic increase
I would have put more emphasis on the fact that the population decline is build into the population structure already. Even if the fertile rate were to go up to 3 children per woman today, the population would still shrink, because there are few young women. Just showing a picture of the population urn would let people understand the situation much better, very easily.
Agree. Weak reporting and analysis. Could have put this is context much better.
And if they marry they do it late, have a western standard, demand huge payments from their to be husbands, who have to be 6 foot+ aka 1,80, own a house, a luxury car and make not less than 100000 $ a year.
@@schattensand isn't karma a b*tch. Chinese society discarded and abused girls and put boys on a pedestal. Now girls are in high demand. I say GOOD. It's their turn to be put on the pedestal. If you want to blame someone blame the pple who created this situation
If their economy has problems in the future, of course Indonesia will also have difficulties. China, Japan and Korea are our friends... We are ready to help them if asked...
@@julieana4695 Isn't your post more a whish to be yourself on a pedestal carried by men? You'r right - women just take their chances - they are not to blame. Only do societies, where some woman and many more men live, not function. Frustrated men become killers and rapists.
Keep in mind these projections are 80 years out! So many things can happen in that time that there's no way that it can be that accurate at the end
Wumao. (And, yes, it's an accurate prediction of who will be alive in eighty years the one that's based on the babies alive today-since people live about...eighty years!)
@@anypercentdeathless i'd immagine alot can happen to influence birth rates in 80 years. Maybe china adopts pro-natalist policy again and swings it around? Maybe a religious revival happens in china like it did in Russia in the early 2000s. Maybe artificial wombs become a thing in 2050 and you can use a robot to raise your child.
Excellent breakdown of truly difficult circumstances.
Endless growth is unsustainable. You can't just keep having more and more people. We have to learn to deal with this problem.
I didn't say overpopulation was a good thing.
That is not close to being true.
@@MyHandelsMessiah Even that is not unlimited. If you actually look at how fast humans have been growing in terms of energy usage it would only take a few centuries to use the full power output of the sun.
@@MyHandelsMessiah Resources for what exactly?
@@bighands69 for people's need of course
Good News! Good for Earth!
Not good, econmic downfall, and what did the people of China do to deserve being looked down upon? many of them don't even support the CCP.
But I see what you mean.
I dont see how this will fix climate change since this decline is only slowly happening.
Plus every person's life matters. I'm disgusted of how careless and such lack of humility people have.
It will be horrible for earth because it will lead to WW3.
The biggest reason why they're scrambling to convince people to have more children is they need more labor to help them build the country. And you would think labor is scarce resource. But lots of employers have absurdly unreasonable requirements for employees that make you feel like labor is not valued. For example, age. Employers are generally obsessed with young graduates when recruiting someone for an entry-level position. I was pushed to leave the after-school tutoring industry after the country issued a policy outlawing extracurricular academic training. I switched to auditing, and in order to get prepared, I intently studied this subject and knowledge of other areas related to it for two years, leading to me passing the major sessions of CPA. But when I started looking for a job in auditing, many HR didn't take me on becuz they thought I was too old, and I was 29.
For some reason people act sad that we will no longer have a 20:1 people to apartment ratio.
It’s going to be worse. The social system will collapse. There won’t be any money for social programs or pensions
you should be sad, your people are educated and highly developed, but you would rather die out and make room for stpid subhumans
@@fjuvo What welfare programs? What pensions? When did the CCP ever care about stuff like that?
Or take most of your working life to purchase it
@@MyHandelsMessiah wealth is not the same thing as GNP.
On bahalf of our planet 🌎 - huge relief!
It’s as if everyone is more concerned about the economic dip than the future or the planet
People would like to live a good life, and a planet of only old people will probably make for a terrible life
Because the economy informs our quality of life. And the planet isn't going anywhere. We could launch every nuke we've got and the Earth would recover.
@@gingerlicious3500 if you mean the earth would recover as in this big rock would continue to hurdle through space closer and closer to the sun yes. But pretty much all life would end. I’m guessing you graduated from HS and don’t understand
@@user-eh8yz6ko3t I graduated from college, actually. But way to display your elitism. Do you also think that poor people are poor because they're lazy? And the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs had more energy than all the atomic weapons on Earth combined. Life on Earth didn't just survive that event, it thrived. You should really do more research into Earth's natural history, particularly some of the mass extinction events Earth has experienced. Life is a lot more resilient than you give it credit for. Kinda ironic how you tried to take a dig at my education level but now I'm the one schooling you. Let me guess, you went to college and got some useless Arts degree? See, now I can be judgy and elitist too. Isn't this fun?
@@theamici When you have a majority of elderly in your population, the young workers aren’t working for their future wealth instead they’re working so that the retired elderly who cannot work are able to live. China uses their elderly pop. to raise children, but if there’s no child for them to raise they’re a financial burden to everyone.
It's always economical pressure, all over the world. Why does it feel like we are getting more more poor as the time flies by?
Because super rich people and companies keep the money hostage.
In the covid years, the rich still got richer. Because all over the planet, they have essentially paid political parties to make the legislation that favours them. Thus, in many countries corporations have rights as though they were a person: yet they do not suffer real consequence when they break the law - eg by practices that endanger people, or by pollution. And it is the legal obligation in many countries for managers to maximise shareholder value; to externalise “costs” like pollution, dumping of material waste, ruining land value etc. So the population pays to clean up rivers, pays for landfill, pays in lost savings when banks go bust, pays private transport companies for the infrastructure investment that the companies were supposed to build before they took profits, etc.
It's because our population has grown continuously
Because thats how the game works. Keep the workers too busy at work so they dont unionize work work together for better time off and better wages. Meanwhile our wealthy take minimum 4 or 5 week vacations and complain when normal people want the same. Seriously its pathetic in north america, people are not as productive because they have barely 2 weeks vacation to look forward too. So why work hard? If you go to germany or pther places with 4 to 5 weeks minimum, you get much more motivated workers who want to enjoy their time off, so try to work smarter and faster, so they can vacation when they want too. Yeah companies may not like it, but letting workers take a decent vacation off (not just 2 weeks continuous) is actually really good for motivation and productivity.
@Power Guy - It’s called “bourgeois democracy,” or democracy for the rich: in the wealthy world, in theory you have a vote, but the poor are kept disorganized and discouraged from voting or through various mechanisms even forbidden from voting, and the middle class are brainwashed into voting as if they might become millionaires tomorrow, plus a variety of gatekeeping mechanisms ensure most people who enter politics are already rich, and they make sure it’s literally legal for other rich people to bribe government and to retain special access to government … so you mostly get government by the rich for the rich. Anatole France put it best: “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike from begging in the streets, from sleeping under bridges, and from stealing loaves of bread.” You are absolutely right: working people today are working twice as long and twice as hard as we did in the 1970s, but we’re only making roughly the same amount of money, and oftentimes de facto less, when you consider that the cutting of benefits means a rise in our cost of living. Meanwhile, in that same timespan, the wealth of capital holders has increased more than twentyfold. So what is to be done? Now, if you’re in the U.S.A. or in Western Europe, you’re in luck: you do legally have full suffrage, so in theory working people could organize and vote consistently as a bloc, and within 20 to 30 years have enacted a completely non-violent revolution and re-taken power. So why don’t you do it?
This is very Good
We need to focus on how to grow an economy without growing a population. It seems our entire economic system is focused on continuous growth of population. I think we need to give serious thought to how to increase per capita wealth and production in a nation with declining population.
That's going to be the challenge of the 21st century. I'm just glad the US will get a buffer of at least thirty years so we can see which model works best before tackling this problem ourselves.
Productivity and CONSUMPTION Less consumers less $$
Not possible. Socialist wet dream
Oh life does move along in countries experiencing decline See: Japan however youthful creativity and vitality is lost that creates new products and services.
Without growing the population, once everyone reaches retirement age there won’t be a large enough working class to support the majority of elderly who arnt working.
Just to think that one couple has to look after 4 elderly (their own and their parents in law) in old age and their grandparents and supposed to raise and pay 2-3 children is a very big expectation.
Nice to start out the day with some good news!
Otherwise people would start killing themselves due to the lack of cope material.
Lol tell us you are sinophobic whitout telling us you are sinophobic.
@@Clarity520 Can you be CCPhobic without being sinophobic? I think it's a reasonable possibility.
@@Alex-ez1lk we are talking about Chinese in general not just CCP.
@@saccount-z3 u quoted 1984?
Wow, this is crazy, I was just talking to my girlfriend about this last night. She's younger than me and I also lived in Asia. I was telling her about how that whole thing about how there's 40 million 'extra' Chinese men is now a moot point because all those men are past fighting/family age now anyway. It's exactly what the woman in the first minute mentions. I'm gonna be dark here but I'd say to expect a wave of suicides. 40 is when the rubber hits the road in life and to be that age, as a dude, with no spouse, parents who are literally just costing you money to be alive AND an economy that is going t*ts up? Pffffftttt that's a baddddd spiritual combo.
We are going to start having that same issue here in my country the USA with high rise of sexless single virgin men up in their late 20s and 30s growing every day all childless as well
lol there are 60 million 'extra' men in India , in your theory much bigger wave should come from India firstly.
Single life is best in modern era. You are wrong here.
Just have to learn to be happy with the small victories in life. Don’t covet everything that you don’t have. Be happy that you’re alive with all your limbs.
The US is fine demographically. Boomers are called boomers because they had lots of babies (i.e. baby boomers) Can't relate with this virgin talk either. We millenials are out here smashing so maybe it's time for you to get away from the screens and go outside
First people are not marrying like they used to in the past. it is becoming difficult to find a life partner for many. people are marrying in their 30s. Besides, raising babies is far difficult today despite having all the luxury. Raising one baby and providing him the best possible life is now more like a struggle than fun.
It also makes a society more prone to violence, it's quite depressing.
"Besides, raising babies is far difficult today despite having all the luxury." We tend to make it more difficult than it actually being more difficult. 150 years ago the actual housing and feeding of children was more difficult than today, yet they had more children,
@@wisenber no pill = no choice = under 6 mortality rate higher = need quantity to increse chances of adult sons/ daughters
@wisenber I get what you mean. I think it's more like the standard of living we expect can't remain with a child. But also more modern issues. Buying power is not in our favor. So everything overall is more expensive vs what we actually make. If you live in a city apartment it's not as diserbale to have kids in such a small space. And then in Asia they seem to expect a lot of money to fund the education and just a lot of money than we do in the west. Also long working ours so less time with the kid or to date. I get what you mean but things have changed.
@@baronvonjo1929 " I think it's more like the standard of living we expect can't remain with a child. But also more modern issues. Buying power is not in our favor." Standards of living were bad for many more 150 years ago, and buying power was as well. Families were more worried about having food than which school their children would attend, yet those children went on to thrive for the most part. "If you live in a city apartment it's not as diserbale to have kids in such a small space. " I think you're onto something. Our desires have changed to make having children less attractive. Take a look at how many people used to be crammed into small living spaces a few generations ago. Even in the US, homes are built much larger now than they were, yet families are smaller.
Excellent
with rivers drying up and basically using the earth's resources up at an alarming rate I think its a good thing this is happening
It doesn't work that way kiddo
Jeez! Ok Jesus.
Ignorant and crass take
More countries need to follow this path, especially 3rd world countries.
China is now 1.4 billion India 1.45 billion
India - 1.35billion
@@Peinnn. china - 10 million
Taiwan - 100 BILLION
Lol
Can imagine Indian immigrants and countless hard-working laborers
what good news! Very heartwarming; thanks!
3:50 the rest of his sentence here depresses me.. We can't simply consume and multiply forever
1.4 billion people is a lot people to feed, i m not worried
Nice
This is good thing for the planet. Every country in the world should try to do the same.
China isn't trying to decline in population.
True. Sanctions should be imposed on Africa
Eccellent!
Fabian is back!!!! Yeah!!!!!
Less human miseries.
Guess you love a future geriatric society
@@khust2993 Absolutely! Societies with more old people are safer and have much less crime. And the workers will have better working conditions
@Lessons in Logic The old people in general have more money because of increasing inequality with time. This means they will be consumers. There will be more consumers and no surplus of workers like there is today. That will give workers more bargaining power
@@paranoah1925 I can tell you're smart. Its funny how many people echo what corporate media says. Sure, shrinking population is bad news if you own a multinational corporation that needs new recruits each year. For the other 99.9% of us though, sounds great. Less traffic, less pollution, less competition.
Untold human misery if these psycho fascists get their way
Cheaper real estate, cleaner air, cleaner drinking water, less traffic... mostly good consequences. Yes there will probably be a few financial busts that clear bad debts out of system but that also has its upsides.
with less people in the Chinese factories, who will manufacture your goods? The global economy will collapse.
@@aditya-ml6km China is a greater threat to global economic stability when its growing than when its shrinking.
@@LCTesla As per now, we don't have a substitute for China. Manufacturing can be shifted to India but that will take several years to happen. Even India's population is heading towards a decline.A global population/economic collapse is inevitable.
@@aditya-ml6km we'll just consume less. One new phone every 5 years. Less fast fashion. Less plastic toys.
@@jiaxingchen7236 profits will stall, global unemployment, and economic crisis will prevail. We have made significant progress as a society only because of a large population of consumers. A whole new economic system would have to be invented.
Wish DW would distinguish between which China they are referring to, the ROC or the PRC.
i never seen a presenter being so happy: ))))
When was she happy??
We have the same boat for China's population decline. I am an unemployed American. I cannot afford to have a family and a child nowadays because of financial stress due to insecure and difficult economic conditions.
The difference is ur not unemployed caring for the elderly of ur house hold. China has clan base familly and not nuclear.
America's demographic problem will be mitigated by immigration.
@@dplocksmith91 yes, countries who offer opportunity have the advantage. But it comes at the cost of social unease plus the departing countries suffer brain drain.
The US is in far better shape population wise.
"We have the same boat"? Very colloquial, wumao.
This would probably be compensated by more automation, robots, AI etc. We won’t need as many people to support the world economy as much as we needed in the past.
Exactly. I just posted a comment about that. Soon, our problem will be not having jobs because everything will be automated. ChatGPT was released less than 2 months ago. Imagine what's gonna happen in 10 years.
@@Adam-nw1vy I actually posted chat gbd 3 quite hard mathematics problems from mathematical olimpiads and it actually solved them if ai can replace a mathematician(not the really good mathematicians who make theorems) then it can pretty much replace anyone
"But AI and robots don't buy stuff" AI and robotics will boost productivity in a shrinking workforce. This will boost wages and in turn, raise consumption dramatically
south korea and japan has already implemented and integrated this to their economic activity, their population declined earlier than china, south korea's numbers of robot per workers is number one in the world, it's 1,000 robots per 10,000 workers
@@J_X999 amd robots consume too consume parts e Ectricity and fluids
Fabian is back
So what ?? We are human beings and not just tools of capitalism to be seen as consumers and workers. If there are lesser people we can enjoy more resources built for more people.
Outstanding bit of news I have waited for years to hear this news.
That is a beautiful chart.
It’s the similar chart as all developed countries
No big deal. They got so many people
Great news for people and earth
The biggest problem with China's population implosion is it occurred before China became rich. As Japan's population has been rapidly declining already for decades. However, because the Japanese were already rich when their population implosion occurred, they were able to build Japanese owned manufacturing facilities around the world in their strongest markets and in which was sufficient to save their economy. Unfortunately for China, China is not rich.
I think most of the world is fine with this.
@@KLRJUNE We don’t need a new TV OR PHONE every two years.
@@winderwonder And yet, most people still buy them. Should tell you something about the human condition.
Generally it costs way too much to care for new born humans right now and even in the not too far future.
Fabien has a very kind look and has consistently given an impartial view of the Chinese progress.
This is great news!!
Finally, some good news!
If you ask me, it's not happening fast enough. Also, while their population may be declining, the Indian population is on the rise. So overall, not overly great news, unfortunately 😕
The faster we rid the world of the CCP, the better for everyone-current and future generations alike.
@@TheSleeper33 Hurt my feelings? That's a subtle way of putting it. Makes me sick to my core is what it does.
Bad news for European. No more cheap stuff in the future
I agree; they spent decades trying desperately to get women to have fewer babies and it worked. Why the pundits are upset, I do not know. They report on one hand about climate change, then turn the tables and complain about a Chinese birth dearth. When will they be happy, and sensible? Automation is going to get rid of many jobs anyhow.
Soo there is less parents to support the elderly while being told to have more children... good job CCP.
Unbelievable how this is so newsworthy. Its population increases would be catastrophic.
This thought provoking and informative long-form discussion on DW news is the antithesis of the vapid and infantile political sound-byte thought-gruel served up by the American mainstream news media. This actual journalism is like rain falling on the desert of the mind to me. I am so grateful for KZhead that allows me access to alternative media sources.
que buenas noticias! necesitamos que maximo hayan 1'000.000.000 en TODO el planeta para proteger lo que queda de la biósfera!
Low population and low pollution and makes earth clean 🌍
The problem with this information is that it doesn't tell you that 90% of the deceased were seniors.
Celebrations all around !!!
Unconditional right to stop our own life medically whenever we want for all adults, my body my choice.
The brain isn’t done developing until 25 so yes, but over 25- and must be evaluated by a psychologist to ensure it’s not a very fast depressive switch for an otherwise happy individual or a manic episode. Also if you have kids under 18 it should be a no.
@@gardeniabrune2125 One can join the army and kill people before 25 ?
Couples that realize their children cannot become established do not raise families. Continued growth over the past few decades follows a similar pattern to that of western nations that enjoyed growth post WWII but the cycle has passed its peak and is in decline. Western nations employ massive immigration to maintain population levels. That means discarding the notion that the country inherently belongs to its own native population. _This_ is London? _Where_ are the British? It is unlikely that China will resort to that kind of measure. Automation will fill the workforce gap. The entire socio-economic model based on growth should be discarded, because growth requires resources that are finite. It is likely that optimum population levels will be determined for each country, which will be enforced by global agencies, either directly or covertly. This vaccine will prevent disease. How can you catch it when you are dead?
Yes the mess that Europe is in due to uncontrolled immigration has led to social bifurcation.
overall in Europe we should cap the number of particular immigration ethnic groups. I mean, I just need to walk the street and I feel in Bangalore or Bejing lately in Munich.
Centralized Planning was sold as a long-term economic solution... but that is just hubris.....Top down Centralized Planning is actually the epitome of the short-term political fix.
Good news. Focus will now be on quality over quantity and contentment over covetment /expansionism.
That’s a good thing, they can save more money & use that more money to make better stuff.
You realize that this means your average Chinese person will have to support both of their parents and all four of their grandparents singlehandedly, yeah? Not a great recipe for saving or investing money.
Fabian is a very decent reporter.
Economic investigator Frank G Melbourne Australia 🇦🇺 still watching this very informative content cheers Frank
family planning is something that should be considered over years of time. those who can afford to, may do so. Those who can't afford, shall think twice, which makes a lot more sense than the government saying you can have only 1 child today, 2 children tomorrow, and 3 children shortly after.
Peter Zeihan has been on top of this for about a decade or more, and his data is pretty useful for this particular issue. Hes also pretty easy to read/watch and understand vs some economists and political scholars.. but its no less informed. Yes some of the predictions get wild but they are more likely than people want to admit.
DW decided to get on the bandwagon after PZ made this news via youtube. So DW tries the same
He also talks a lot of BS about things he's got no clue about (see for example Russia/Ukraine). He's got his stick and just applies it everywhere. Ask about specifics (which people rarely do) and you immediately see he's not somebody to take too seriously.
@@_SpamMe yet very serious people that make very serious decisions do.
@@_SpamMe Whenever someone praises zeihan, another will bring him down. What does his thoughts on russia and ukraine have to do with population collapse in china, which is what this comment and video are about? Smh
A lot of the things he said are complete bollocks.
In the long term this is for the better
This can only be a good thing for the world IMO
IMO, fewer Americans will definitely better the world, and I'm American. Why would you hope for a dumber world?
The Chinese may someday need people from El Salvador and Nicaragua - that would be a heck of a turn of events.
China's future will not be capitalist. It is a slowly failing system and won't address the problems humanity is facing.
more likely from Africa
Or turn to automation and robotics (of course if that’s the case why not make it in the places where it will be sold at).
Oh no! They are like the Brits and the American South! China doesn’t allow immigration they don’t want the bloodline mixed
India is closer to China
This is actually good news. This also should be an eye opening woment for humanity to realize that ANY system that relies on endless population growth is destined to fail. We're nearing an era where the human lifespan will undergo a radical extension, the only two options to respond to this to avoid a logistical collapse would be to either 1) Ban the use of such technology, which is cruel because you'll be legislating that people have to die via the authority of states. This will inevitably lead to the rich and powerful finding a workaround to gain access to the tehchnology that would perpetuate their life while the rest die off which would simoutaneously lead to a dynasty system of wealth and political power and increasing sosciopolitical instability as the rest of your society will initially try to become of the select few who get to perpetuate their life and once they realize the chances are against them the system will destabilize as any system that enforced policies that made life or death decisions on the population based on class has throught history. 2) Radically reduce our reproduction. If lets say that we enter a transhumanist era that allows people to live for centuries (let alone millennia) then it would stand to reason to have a reproduction rate of less than a kid per century per person.
China is going to struggle with an aging population going forward though, maybe technology will fill in some of these gaps?
@@MrJonezy541 Oh I don't doubt that this will create issues. This proves that our systems that we're currently using as a species are less than well designed. Technology definately is part of the solution, heck I even posed the correct use of life extending technology as a positive in my original comment, however that's the key "correct use" A tool's utility is highly correleated on how you use it. Automation, robotics and transhuamnism have the potential to emancipate humanity beyond our wildest dreams. However doing so in a broken system like the ones that are implemented today will only result in them being used wrong and eventaually cause harm and destabilization. The technology is not the problem here, we need to refine our political system to a superior model of democracy AND we need to start a process of adopting a post-monetary framework.
If we would collectivly decide to ban it then have those who still use it imprisoned till the end of their days while giving them the option of a clean painless death. Seeing how the world works currently, the rich being those who decide how things go, it isn't likely this would become legislature like that. If we go for the second option, the technology solves it all aproach so to speak, space will need to be settled with ever inceasing waves of people living there. The earth made hollow for more living space. Mars, Venus, the moon made our homes and generation ships built to venture beyond our Solar System. All that in a pace to keep up with the explosion of people getting ressources to gurantee for all people good living standards. If the reproduction is reduced, we may wanna see to it that it is nothing permanent, a fall back option kept open or have again not a genetic approach but a prevention system. This will also be then the start we activly creat subspecies. As with option two, it would not be forbidden, but still not everyone will be able to afford every enhancement as these will most likely be patented(patent system should be rethought anyways). If so the rich will accumulated certain traits they easily can afford but still wont sell to the heighest bidder, like a trophy to show they are better, which geneticly speaking they might really then be under certain aspects andperspectives. That would lead to inbreeding, soemthing upper classes did already anyways. Which will lead to a new species eventually. Rulers who look down on the rest of us. ... well that is one way how it could go down.
@@kinngrimm Numbers correspond to your paragraphs I'll answer 1) That's a really bad idea. For one banning technology has never been effective in the long run and to make matters worse you'll be running against people's survival drive. This means that you'll always have people who will try to find a work-around to get access to it. Hypothetical: that's how you end up with the dystopia of Elyseum. It would be far better to make that technology widely available but reduce reproduction rates, the best scenario would be by adopting a way to extend human lifespan that stops reproduction (such as cybernetic immortality, a machine body can't reproduce) 2) The second option I described is extremely viable, especially if we go the bionic route instead of the biological life extension route. A slower reproduction rate while technology still rises at an exponential rate whilst also humanity breaking from teh limitations of biolody open us the option of conquering space. The solar system alone has enough resources to support quintillions of people living like rich people, (becasue it's massive and full of resources) by the time you approach any meaningful hard logistical limit to populations you will have options to move city sized ships to other solar systems. Basically our technology will evolve radically faster than our population if we go down this rouse making overpopulation functionally a non-issue for as long as the universe keeps chugging along. 3)I don't know if it will be a case of "subspecies" per se. It's more likely that we'll see vast categories of modifications that are desigbned to better fit a person's needs/aesthetics/design/identity/ etc. (Think of how bionics are portrayed in the Alita manga series) I believe tha patent system should be abolished and bionics/life extension should be considered as part of the public healthcare system and the healthcare system should be expanded and any and all attempt to privatize it should be met with absolute resistance. And that's why I also advocate the abolishement of capitlaism along with transhumanism
I agree with what Prof. Hans Rosling had to say about how to control population growth. What qualifies you to make these (silly) comments?
4:24 "angst" has entered the english dictionary
2:35 Training chop-sticks. That's adorable.
this is great news for literally everybody, but the super rich.
Super rich: we're run out cheap labour
yeah the consequences will be beneficial for the environment.
Not if it keeps growing richer like USA or other developed countries creating alot more pollution
@@johnl.7754 agree. I just saw a stastic today that in my country Austria, an average person ears 1500 animals (pigs, cows) in their life, while in Africa it's 150.
@@johnl.7754 growing richer doesnt mean more polution, it can also mean less polution if done right
@@wokeaf1337 but vast majority won’t and things people import from other countries will also contribute to environmental problems.
@@wokeaf1337 yeah unlike the US, china is actually trying to go green with its power and transport infrastructure. We literally have americans state talking about banning EVs because it threatens the oil industry
Woah.
Aaaye Fabián in the homeland!!♥️
Population might be bad for the nation but good for nature
I’ve noticed as technology advances, the population decreases. I think with the rapid development of AI there will be solutions. But it’s not the government’s responsibility to decide how you do your family. The audacity to think they have the right to do such a thing!
I totally agree with you, the best contraception is technological advancement. The development of electricity saved time for housewives to pursue high degrees and enter the workforce, the more money they earn the less willing they are to become full-time housewives, thus causing a drop in population
@@changliu2239 great point 👍🏻 I appreciate your input on women in the workforce. Nothing wrong with a working mom, and I don’t want to pass judgement on everyone, but sadly many leave their toddlers in the hands of strangers or elderly grand parents because, in the most part, many men aren’t leading and working harder to provide for the family. Love takes sacrifice. Our generation just doesn’t understand the blessings that come out of not always chasing after self-fulfillment. I’ve seen too many families broken because of men or women who don’t honour their commitment to their spouse and kids.
@@TheLilleyPad Great input, the psychological effects cannot be overlooked. About these psychological effects, I believe they are closely associated with technological development as well. Here is my opinion: several centuries ago the mortality rate was much higher than today because healthcare was bad. Parents didn't want to give their kids education because they could die at any moment, putting all previous investments to waste. Instead, parents gave birth to a lot of kids, because the more kids they had, the higher the chance they could have kids surviving until adulthood and have someone who could look after them when they become too old. Right now we have really kickass healthcare, kids don't die easily like in the old days, so parents start investing in their education hoping they can ride the train of upwards social mobility and earn big money. This change of mindset immediately increases the cost of raising a kid, since education is EXPENSIVE, thus creating the current image of "raising a kid is REALLY EXPENSIVE". Well well well, this image scares young people and they refuses to have kids, even if they have kids, some of them will, just like you've pointed out, give their kids to someone else. Do you think my theory make sense? I am really interested in knowing your opinion :)
@@changliu2239 Yes, that very well may be a factor. Many people complain about the cost of raising children as the reason they chose not to have kids. Unfortunately, in some cultures having only one child can lead to a single adult taking care of parents of both families (4 seniors) plus their own children under one roof. The idea of “it takes a village to raise a kid” is not true at all in my opinion. We all know what happens when there is more than one mother in the house! 😱☺️ I take parenting seriously and raise my child with biblical values.
@@TheLilleyPad “village to raise a kid” is how it was for all of history until recently
Great news!!!
A shrinking population is a good thing for countries and the world. We don’t need to destroy the only planet we have by having a constant growing population.
China's healthcare system is eerily similar to the US system. People can't afford care. There already weren't enough doctors in China. Now 250+ million chinese have the new covid strain. Many of them are elderly... my heart and prayers go out to the people of China, they deserve better
Does China have a system of Doctor's offices and specialty clinic scattered throughout both big cities and small towns or is the vast majority of healthcare supplied by a few large facilities in major cities ?
Not when it comes to Organ Transplants. If you are a powerful communist party official in China and you need a new heart or kidney, they will "find" one for you in a few weeks. Many teenagers are "missing" in a country with the largest number of security cameras in the world. Cameras equipped with Facial recognition software that can track down a Hong Kong dissident in minutes but cant find a missing teenager. If George Orwell was alive he could have wrote a terrifying sequel to 1984.
@@goobfilmcast4239 the second one i believe. they like centralized medicine
Not true, China's healthcare system is universal and not for profit because it is a socialist system. For the people, medical costs are negligible and Chinese universities are generating an ongoing stream of doctors so the whole system is completely sustainable. Chinese students also don't pay tuition for medical schools.
Medical cost is cheap in china because it is subsidized. We in west really have way too many china experts who never set a foot im china
What people tend to miss is that the artificial one child policy was likely one of the main causes of china's economic rise. They had a fantastic working to dependant ratio. They'll stagnate for a few decades but after that, the median income and wealth is going to rise significantly, because fewer people are inheriting from more and there is going to be less competition on the labor market.
What will be there to inherit if everything is just leased from the government… 100 years seems long until you live on the land for 50 years, then it’s only 50 years left. No wealth compounding.
'going to be less competition on the labor market' - yes, in fact currently 2-300 million Chinese do not have a fix contract an are on stand-by contracts, fresh diploma students cannot find enough white collar work in line with their education. less competition on the labor market will take decades to arrive keeping their wages low. They may inherit more, but in place of the CCP I would tax it. (they will tax it). Furthermore declining supply on the labor market leads to wage inflation and takes away China's competitive edge. New carbon tariffs introduced by the EU, and possibly be the US will further cut their advantages. Their export surplus will decline and I do not see (see my observation above) sufficient income growth internally for them to transform into a consumer based economy. Technological disadvantages will exacerbate their problems and they will be reliant on western imports. However you do make a fair point by stating that there is an oversupply of labor in the coming decade.
It's going to be too late at that point to matter. The sheer burden of having a ton of old, retired people and not remotely enough younger people to support them is going to drive the population through the floor, and by the time the top-heavy retiree population is finally all dead, the economy will already be a shell of its former self.
I've heard there will be a significant number of people in China who find themselves the only person to care for 2 elderly parents and 4 elderly grandparents because of the one child policy. That doesn't leave a person a lot of time to be active in the labour force. Now, you are likely right that eventually those people will inherit a lot ..... if their parents and grandparents have a lot of assets .... though given that China was so poor until recently that is not necessarily going to be the case. And it will be a problem throughout the century as the working age population shrinks as the elderly population increases. I believe that in 1980 when China started its transformation the median age in the country was 24 so there were lots of young people ready to work in the years ahead. By 2050 the median age in China is expected to be 47 or so meaning that there are going to be a lot of older people who don't want to work as hard anymore or possibly not want to work at ali. Though it is true that Japan, South Korea, Italy and many other countries will have the same problem. One particular problem China is facing is that unlike those other countries it is facing demographic collapse before becoming a wealthy country. China's per capita income is still very low compared to most countries facing demographic collapse.
That's not how it works... China is literally following the same model of Japan, except China doesn't have as much wealth(per Capita). China's GDP is not measured in the same way OECD countries are, they rely on exports and infrastructure projects for it's number. China knows this and they know it will stagnate for good if they don't try to increase domestic consumption, problem is they don't have the money to do so. Falling demographic will do huge damage to rural China, but big cities like Beijing and Shanghai will be able to barely manage their debts. Overall, this isn't going to be good for China or the world, it will cause inflation and instability particularly in China which can lead a mad man to make dumb decisions.
On the one hand, a declining population means fewer workers to employ. On the other hand, a declining population means fewer consumers to feed. If GDP declines slower than population, then GDP per person increases. Also, a smaller working force can demand higher wages.
It wont be like they say, the work load will just move country
A couple of points to note here, firstly has anyone ever made an accurate population prediction 80 years into the future ? Secondly (and this is the problem with all predictions) that point in the future will be dealing with the conditions of that point in time, not those of today or the past, we just can't know what those conditions will be. China with a population of 6~700 million in the 22nd century will be a very different China than when it last had a population of 6~700million in the 19th century.
Maybe they just bring back mating like rabbit and younger labor force. Problem solved.
China at 300 million will be cleaner, more peaceful and wealthier.
Whatever the consequence, it won't be half as bad as having more of them.. Edited for younger audiences!
this is either a comment made by someone incredibly racist and if not that then a climate alarmist. wrong either way though.
@user-zn2lk1wx1j My buddy.. if there was a racist Olympics.. I wouldn't even go because there'll be fkn foreigners there 😅
Damn Zeihans realy got everybody talking about this.
he gets one thing right and people believe all the other bunk predictions he makes. Wheres the part china splits up into different countries or Poland invades germany?
The consequences would be positive. Less strain on the envrionment, less traffic, shorter waiting times, etc.
It's not declining fast enough, it can never be fast enough.
That decline will lead to economic instability and collapse for China. That in turn will lead to WW3 which will be 100 times worse for the environment than the current climate change problem. China that just slowly fades out is a better option and maybe they reevaluate their positions and start to do the right thing.
the speed is the whole issue, nations get wrecked by a fast decline
China is working on that, they are freezing, starving, drowning even exterminating people. The official numbers are probably still very inflated and we will never know the real numbers with the CCP in charge. Anyway China is reducing the worlds population one Chinese person at a time.
@@bighands69 hence the coming tribulations, sure~.
@@bighands69 China will not collapse, its a dictatorship, they rule by absolute control and force, they need to go backwards, their explosive growth is not sustainable and enriching a regime like theirs will be a Russia 2.0 eventually wanting to dominate. I would rather have a democracy dominate with faults than a communist regime. The world needs to decouple slowly from China and diversify supply chains as fast as possible.
Very good news! Our planet is overcrowded
This may stop Climate Change too
How about you self sacrifice and save the planet
@@Plumthyme3849 not fast enough. I read that even if all human activity stopped today, a lot of affects have been rolled into action and will continue
feel free to take yourself out if you truly believe that
@@paranoah1925 As if the climate hasnt changed in the past. Just say you want the boot on your neck
Old fashioned thinining - more people means more people to sell goods too thus making the already rich richer.
Imagining that subsaharian Africa will likely have around 4 billion people in 2100... humanity re--volution.
The demographic bomb has gone off along time ago. This is now inevitable.
Lol. DW actually said that overpopulation lead to famine and didn't even mention Mao's disasterous farm collectivization.
Dw is China puppet
"According to official numbers...." -- Take with a grain of salt. However, their population IS shrinking. Everyone knows where this is headed, but some just can't/won't say it outloud.
yeah by 2100 china will be.... 2x the size of the US instead of 4x Big woop.
@@hughmungus2760 Han, who?
I understand that famous Chinese inventor and member of the executive yuan, Lìng Yīgè-Háizi, has invented a new machine which will solve all of China's population problems. It looks a little like a sewing machine, with a needle at one end like a normal sewing machine, but no place to put the thread. It is placed at the end of a production line, and the products pass through the machine and receive one strike of the needle each. It will be introduced into Beijing's principal condom-producing factory later this year.
if it is true，it is awesome
Trust me, bro -this dude