HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » China unveils two-child p...

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 09:25 AM

China unveils two-child policy

Source: CNN

It's official. From January 1, 2016 China will allow two children for every couple.

Chinese lawmakers rubber-stamped the new legislation Sunday during a session of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, which governs the country's laws, the state-run Xinhua news agency reported.

<snip>



<snip>

Human rights group Amnesty International issued a statement warning that the change in policy was "not enough."

"Couples that have two children could still be subjected to coercive and intrusive forms of contraception, and even forced abortions -- which amount to torture," China researcher William Nee said.

"The state has no business regulating how many children people have," he said.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/27/asia/china-two-child-policy/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

36 replies, 3268 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 36 replies Author Time Post
Reply China unveils two-child policy (Original post)
bananas Dec 2015 OP
Sunlei Dec 2015 #1
jwirr Dec 2015 #10
Feeling the Bern Dec 2015 #25
davidpdx Dec 2015 #26
Feeling the Bern Dec 2015 #36
trillion Dec 2015 #31
JonathanRackham Dec 2015 #2
still_one Dec 2015 #4
Feeling the Bern Dec 2015 #24
Gregorian Dec 2015 #3
daleo Dec 2015 #5
GliderGuider Dec 2015 #6
daleo Dec 2015 #7
GliderGuider Dec 2015 #8
jwirr Dec 2015 #9
daleo Dec 2015 #13
jwirr Dec 2015 #16
daleo Dec 2015 #20
Feeling the Bern Dec 2015 #23
davidpdx Dec 2015 #27
Feeling the Bern Dec 2015 #35
The2ndWheel Dec 2015 #11
Gregorian Dec 2015 #12
daleo Dec 2015 #14
jwirr Dec 2015 #17
daleo Dec 2015 #19
The2ndWheel Dec 2015 #21
left-of-center2012 Dec 2015 #15
Feeling the Bern Dec 2015 #22
AngryAmish Dec 2015 #18
davidpdx Dec 2015 #28
DonCoquixote Dec 2015 #29
FLPanhandle Dec 2015 #30
trillion Dec 2015 #32
The2ndWheel Dec 2015 #33
FLPanhandle Dec 2015 #34

Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 09:32 AM

1. Americans seek stem cell treatments in China - NBC News



Americans seek stem cell treatments in China - NBC News



www.nbcnews.com/...stem_cells/.../americans-seek-stem-c...








NBCNews.com




Jan 6, 2008 - More than a year after he received stem cell therapy in China, Hrabik says he has ... of dollars needed for travel and the hope for a miracle cure.


Blind Baby Travelling Overseas for Stem Cell Therapy



www.stemcellresearchnews.net/.../BlindBabyTravellingOverseasforStemC...



Blind Baby Travelling Overseas for Stem Cell Therapy. 10-month-old, Jakob Bielskis, who was born without site, is traveling China from Canada with his parents ...


Stem Cell Research - Stem Cell Treatments - Treatments ...



www.stemcellresearchnews.net/






Joanna and Anthony Clark found the Chinese stem cell therapy option after doing research via the ... ALS Patient Travels to Mexico for Stem Cell Treatment


Seeking Novel Treatments Abroad. Stem Cell Tourism - Cellr4



www.cellr4.org/article/700






Feb 4, 2014 - Traveling abroad for stem cell treatments, “stem cell tourism,” poses ... the most popular destinations for stem cell therapies include China, ...


Stem Cell Therapy for ALS Patients - Evenbetterhealth.com



www.evenbetterhealth.com/als-stemcell.php






Many people are travelling to Beijing to take part in this unique therapy. ... As with any new scientific procedure, stem cell therapy or surgery is controversial, ... For a comprehensive list of articles relating to stem cell treatments in China, and to

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 11:53 AM

10. I hear what you are saying but how does this fit into the 2

child policy discussion? I am a bit tired after Xmas but am not seeing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 04:05 AM

25. There is a stem cell research facility with advertisement for services two miles from my condo

 

in wuxi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Feeling the Bern (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 05:21 AM

26. I lived in Wuxi a few years ago

I wasn't in the city, but out in the countryside.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #26)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 09:26 AM

36. I'm spitting distance to Tai Hu.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 08:24 AM

31. It was my understanding that stem cells are now made out of fat, not embryos

 

oh never mind. It looks like embryos are still the preferred method.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 09:33 AM

2. China sounds like the anti-Planned Parenthood of the east.

So much for respecting a woman's right to choose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonathanRackham (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 10:21 AM

4. Ironically, the reason many in China desire multiple children is because they have no MALE heirs,

and they keep trying until a boy is produced.

As for the world outrage, the United States has slowly be taking away a woman's right to choose, and that along with women's rights, so countries in glass houses shouldn't throw too many stones.

Just look at how a great many of the American populous does not have any desire to help Middle Eastern and South American refugees.

It wasn't that long ago during the bush administration when:

"A senior United Nations official has accused President George Bush of "doing damage to Africa" by cutting funding for condoms, a move which may jeopardise the successful fight against HIV/Aids in Uganda.
Stephen Lewis, the UN secretary general's special envoy for HIV/Aids in Africa, said US cuts in funding for condoms and an emphasis on promoting abstinence had contributed to a shortage of condoms in Uganda, one of the few African countries which has succeeded in reducing its infection "

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/aug/30/usa.aids




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonathanRackham (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 04:02 AM

24. That's why hospital advertise abortion services on buses and taxis.

 

No right to choose.

An abortion costs 8000RMB in most hospitals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 10:01 AM

3. So basically, let's just put a cherry on top of this thing.

Planet turd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 10:40 AM

5. Now that they have adopted a form of capitalism, their birth rates will tend to below replacement

Modern capitalism is failing in the social reproduction function, the most elemental function any system has to succeed in, in order to survive. Capitalists don't want to support investments necessary for child rearing, and the integration of young adults into adult life.

In the past, the lack of birth control technology and knowledge assured that their would be adequate supplies of new generations of workers. That's no longer true, so birth rates have fallen below replacement in most advanced capitalist states. The capitalist classes are attempting to make up for this via immigration, but as capitalism goes global, there are fewer and fewer regions with high birth rates, and these sources are less culturally and educationally congruent with advanced capitalism.

I see this as capitalism's most dire existential threat, though it will takes decades, even centuries to fully play itself out. China's recent history is a good example of this dynamic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 10:50 AM

6. If capitalism could drop world birth rates to negative while simultaneously restraining consumption

 

I'd be totally in favour of it. We need to get the planet heading back below 10% or so of current human activity levels. But I don't think capitalism has the chops to do that. Or the global-scale conscience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GliderGuider (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 11:06 AM

7. At some point you would have to re-establish replacement birth rates, though

Granted, the Earth's human population need not be in the billion plus range to ensure that the species survives. But, when an optimum level is reached, the social system would have to re-establish replacement birthrates. In an advanced technological society, that probably means some form of socialism, though possibly mixed with small scale capitalism. I can't see any other viable way for humanity in the far future. Free-booting global capitalism is just too erratic in the long run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #7)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 11:13 AM

8. The sustainable level of population is too low to maintain any significant technology.

 

My research has convinced me that the maximum "truly sustainable" level of human activity is between 10 to 50 million people, living at average consumption levels no higher than a moderately affluent hunter-gatherer.

Here's the article in which I outlined the basis for my views a couple of years ago:
http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Sustainability.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GliderGuider (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 11:51 AM

9. I'm not really sure that any form of government can accomplish

that without giving the people a reason they understand. And let's face it most people on this planet do not understand what is happening due to overpopulation.

I also think the fact that they are not replacing themselves has a lot to do with the fact that under the 1 child policy they were aborting girls (future mothers) so they could have a boy baby. They made this problem themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 04:27 PM

13. My demographic reading indicates that China's fertility ratio is similar to most western countries

That would be about 1.5 to 2.0 children per woman, with a typical figure around 1.75. So, China is not unique in terms of a birth rate below replacement.

There has been sex selection in favour of males, which has exacerbated the problem as you indicate. That's not the case in the west, so they are unique that way. They are also different, in terms of having a very limited immigration level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 07:52 PM

16. Limited immigration level. I do not know much about this

aspect but it seems to me that they do not take many in but many do not leave either. Am I correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 09:21 PM

20. Well, I work with a woman who emmigrated from China

Much of the time it is grad students, applying for permanent residency, then citizenship. In Canada, China is a pretty significant source country for foreign students and immigrants.

I don't know the numbers, as far as immigration to China is concerned, but I think it is not very significant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 04:01 AM

23. There is no limited immigration for skilled, educated labor

 

(teachers, businessmen, scientists, doctors). China has massive brain drain as the best and the brightest leave and don't come back.

Z visas are not hard to get, as are F visas. D visas are nearly impossible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Feeling the Bern (Reply #23)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 05:25 AM

27. I had a student in China who I talked to quite frequently and he stated he was going to stay

and join the party. Being the slight antagonist I am, I told him he'd be better off taking his skills and leaving. He said he wants to be part of the new generation to help change the government. My response was a look that say good luck with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 09:25 AM

35. Party won't change. No political party or dynasty changes. One one goes to another

 

they are all just as corrupt and self interested as the last. Don't let the name fool you. China has a long history of going from one despot to another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 12:49 PM

11. Every institution we've built requires more people

Call it capitalism, socialism, civilization, or whatever, they all need more people. More young people specifically. At least if we want mass social systems and programs, and the somewhat abnormal abstraction called retirement. Those systems and programs are of course the same ones which help to amplify our contributions to the environmental issues we have to adapt to. As do our technological advances, which we invent as a result of there being so many people, and all the stuff we want.

We can't stop, but we can't continue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The2ndWheel (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 02:41 PM

12. Really. It's weird and paradoxical.

Let's go back to pre-emission eras and see how fun a root canal would be.

It's so complicated a subject it's hard t oknow where to begin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The2ndWheel (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 04:42 PM

14. Systems can be devised for a steady state population

It is just a matter of appropriate planning. Take pensions, for example. Once a population reaches a steady state, pension systems can be devised that are sustainable. Systems that require a constantly increasing population are Ponzi schemes, and that's not a physically or mathematically viable solution.

Capitalism officially rejects anything that smacks of central planning and it has continuous growth as an essential dogma. But any system that abhors planning, on principle, will fail to do the necessary planning to solve existential problems. Similarly, any system that assumes continuous growth as a central dogma will fail eventually, as inputs are finite.

But these are a new problems in human history, so we haven't really come to grips with it. The human race will have to grow up, in the next few hundred years. That will mean discarding capitalism, as we know it. Eventually, survival will demand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 08:05 PM

17. To me this is actually a comforting statement. There will

be an answer if we want it. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 09:17 PM

19. That's how I see it too

They may say we are dreamers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleo (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 11:13 PM

21. I doubt we can take everything into account to accomplish that

That not even just humanity, but all of life that we've volunteered ourselves to be the stewards of. If it's a finite planet, then everything is give and take. Humans don't do well with limits though. Limits aren't fair, because who has the right to tell who what to do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 07:48 PM

15. What happens if they have more than two?

What becomes of the extra children?
What happens to the parents?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 03:59 AM

22. Usually, a fine.

 

The One Child policy had exemptions:

1: People living in the countryside
2: Ethnic minorities
3: Farmers
4: Anyone married to a foreigner

The one-child policy applies to city living Han Chinese (92% of the Chinese population). This will also apply to city living Han Chinese.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Sun Dec 27, 2015, 08:50 PM

18. What if one has two children and neither is sexy?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 05:31 AM

28. China is having the same problem as Korea and Japan

The low birth rate compounded by the cost of raising a child is going to decrease the population. I read somewhere that India will actually surpass China as the most populace country at some point. Given how small India is compared to China (1.27 million sq miles to 9.6 million sq miles respectively), how all those people will survive is a scary thought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 07:39 AM

29. There is one facet of this

that few have addressed. China is built around large families. It's entire culture depends on having large extended families, and also having to learn to share and work with the large number of siblings you had to live with, rich or poor.

Now, with a lot of these one or two digit families, all of the resources and attention gets poured onto ONE child, who very often is sent to the West in the hope of getting a degree. These kids often have much more sophistication then their previous counterparts, but they are also very aware, and , to be blunt, many of them have BIG EGOS and outright contempt for Chinese culture, a point that is NOT lost on the locals.

http://knowledge.ckgsb.edu.cn/2015/05/05/globalization/homeward-bound-chinese-sea-turtles-return-to-a-new-reality/
http://www.economist.com/news/china/21580470-students-coming-back-home-helped-build-modern-china-so-why-are-they-now-faring-so-poorly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haigui

So, China wants to maintain it's culture, and foster a native culture that is resistant to western influences, despite the fact that they need our economy to survive (which does not work very well for us in the U.S. either.) So, they have to do this. If not, they can see the Russians, who are rich in wealth and power, but whose population has been dropping every year.

Of course, this is a true ecological, financial, and cultural disaster in the making. You think the Mid east will start the war to end all wars, just wait what happens when several hundred million of the PRC's children realize they really have nothing to lose. They can summon up every dead demon, from Maoism to Hyper-Capitalism, in order to get what in all fairness, was stolen from them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bananas (Original post)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 07:48 AM

30. The entire world should be under a one child policy

Of course, overpopulation is a sensitive topic around here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FLPanhandle (Reply #30)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 08:28 AM

32. I wouldn't have been born had that been the case back then. Would you?

 

The whole world needs to invest in education. It's proven that the more education people have the less children they have no matter what country they are in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trillion (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 09:04 AM

33. But the more education people have

the more stuff they want, and things they do.

It's not population or consumption. It's both. The way we've kept people from having more kids is by increasing their own ability to consume. If you have 1 person consuming the same as 3, 4, or 5 other people, whatever the number would be, having just that 1 person doesn't matter much. Plus, since it's about fairness, all those other people that are alive need to be given the opportunity to increase their own ability to consume. So we'll be carving up the planet for a while longer, since all 7+ billion people aren't hooked into the global system just yet.

There's really no answer to the question. Nobody can ask someone else to sacrifice something for the greater good without being willing to do it themselves, and nobody is really willing to do it themselves. Even i enough people were willing to do that, the economy would crash, as demand creates jobs.

We can't escape.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trillion (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 28, 2015, 09:22 AM

34. Irrelevant.

Your post is a prime example of how this topic generates emotional responses vs. logical ones around here.

Current population levels are ecologically unsustainable. We need to reduce the population either voluntarily or, eventually, the food chain collapses and we will be reducing the population involuntarily.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread