China reforms: One-child policy to be relaxed

[AgeofKnowledge]

WRONG! You should have asked what I meant if you had a question rather than make up a lie about what I said and wrongly assign the lie you made up to me.

What I said exactly is:

"I'm going to side with you on this issue and say there's more than a desirable number of modern humans on the planet for a truly balanced ecosystem and, of course, the Chinese are responsible for more than their fair share.

Birth control is a desirable and ultimately necessary method for controlling the world's human population and I am not against a blanket state policy of sterilizing both the mother and the father after the first child to achieve that balance."

I NEVER said that "American babies are worth saving, but Chinese babies need to die" nor would I as it's not true, doesn't conform to the Christian teaching of Imago Dei, and I certainly don't believe such a thing. YOU said that. I NEVER did.

I NEVER advocated for abortion which is murder and as a Christian I AM obviously against. I NEVER advocated for infanticide which is murder and as a Christian I AM obviously AGAINST. I NEVER advocated for the death of ANYONE AT ALL PERIOD.

You made up a terrible lie and falsely assigned it to me. Shame on you for doing that.

People, if you have questions just ask. It's that simple.

Please do NOT be so evil as to make up reprehensible lies and then falsely attribute the lies you made up to someone who never said it.

AOK seems to think that American babies are worth saving, but Chinese babies need to die.

 

[spursfan2012]

Disclaimer: I don't necessarily whole-heartedly believe in the one child policy, but I think it's crudely misrepresented in the U.S.



I don't think the Chinese government thinks having children or siblings is evil. They enacted the policy because they saw the trajectory of their population reaching an unprecedented number. In order to effectively control resources and the poverty levels, the government enacted the policy in the 1970s. Since then, China has arguably moved more people out of poverty in such a short time than any civilization.

I agree that the policy had some negative effects, including infanticide and some government pressure on family's that had more than one child.

However, I think the video you posted and the overall western conception of the one child policy is a little skewed. It only applies to 30-40% of the urban Han population (not minorities or rural dwellers), and it IS possible to have more than one if the parents pay certain fees (I've heard about $20,000 worth). I actually know quite a few college aged people with siblings.

Maybe the forced abortion scenarios happened many years ago or are very isolated, but it's not as common as that video seems.

In terms of abortion, most estimates (some cited in the article below) estimate American women have more abortions per capita than Chinese women. Also, it's wrong to assume every family in China with one child had many abortions before that child, when you would never make that assumption with an American family with one child.


This article does a good job of explaining many aspects of the policy, and has citations.
HowStuffWorks "What is China's one-child policy?"

No government should EVER force parents telling them what to do in terms of how many children they must have or not have, or imposing a fee on them. That is like telling them that children are a BAD thing! Children are a blessing from God. We must learn to appreciate life more and not try to sugar-coat what these governments are doing.

 

[Drett]

No government should EVER force parents telling them what to do in terms of how many children they must have or not have, or imposing a fee on them. That is like telling them that children are a BAD thing! Children are a blessing from God. We must learn to appreciate life more and not try to sugar-coat what these governments are doing.

I agree with everything you said except I am still undecided about imposing a fee. I think the fee is ok if it is not a fine but a contribution toward maintaining health services etc for those that can pay.

China is going to find out though that in a couple of decades they are going to struggle unless they actually bring in workers from outside which is rather ironic.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I don't see that at all.

China's active labor force participation rate is projected in 2030 to be 798.5 million. Currently it is 816.5 million.

Labor force, total | Data | Table

In 2030, China's labor force participation rate will be close to what it is now and so will their population. China's population in 2030 is projected to be 1,393,076,000. China's population currently (as of November 28, 2013) is 1,361,320,000.

China Statistical Yearbook 2011

I'm not seeing it Drett.

China is going to find out though that in a couple of decades they are going to struggle unless they actually bring in workers from outside which is rather ironic.

 

[zone]

WRONG! You should have asked what I meant if you had a question rather than make up a lie about what I said and wrongly assign the lie you made up to me.

What I said exactly is:

"I'm going to side with you on this issue and say there's more than a desirable number of modern humans on the planet for a truly balanced ecosystem rolleyes and, of course, the Chinese are responsible for more than their fair share.

Birth control is a desirable and ultimately necessary method for controlling the world's human population and I am not against a blanket state policy of sterilizing both the mother and the father after the first child to achieve that balance."

this is HORRIBLE.
disgusting.....who are YOU to call for a BLANKET POLICY of the sterilization of ANYONE.

you and your family go FIRST.
and maybe the extra kids your family already has should be taken by THE STATE that will do the enforcing.

ONE CHILD is enough. RIGHT

 

[jimmydiggs]

WRONG! You should have asked what I meant if you had a question rather than make up a lie about what I said and wrongly assign the lie you made up to me.

What I said exactly is:

"I'm going to side with you on this issue and say there's more than a desirable number of modern humans on the planet for a truly balanced ecosystem and, of course, the Chinese are responsible for more than their fair share.

Birth control is a desirable and ultimately necessary method for controlling the world's human population and I am not against a blanket state policy of sterilizing both the mother and the father after the first child to achieve that balance."

I NEVER said that "American babies are worth saving, but Chinese babies need to die" nor would I as it's not true, doesn't conform to the Christian teaching of Imago Dei, and I certainly don't believe such a thing. YOU said that. I NEVER did.

I NEVER advocated for abortion which is murder and as a Christian I AM obviously against. I NEVER advocated for infanticide which is murder and as a Christian I AM obviously AGAINST. I NEVER advocated for the death of ANYONE AT ALL PERIOD.

You made up a terrible lie and falsely assigned it to me. Shame on you for doing that.

People, if you have questions just ask. It's that simple.

Please do NOT be so evil as to make up reprehensible lies and then falsely attribute the lies you made up to someone who never said it.

You and Margaret sanger must have gone to school together.

 

[Ritter]

You and Margaret sanger must have gone to school together.

His thinking in this case struck me as more Malthusian, but that's a fair assessment.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

You two (Jimmydiggs and zone) are committing libel against me, sinning against me, and acting very foolishly besides. It's impossible to have a real discussion with you about this because you are solely and single-mindedly engaging in those three activities against me with total disregard for understanding what I am actually trying to communicate.

You just don't care what MY meaning is. You have made up your own false interpretations that are not what I meant and are now intent on driving those false interpretations all the way down my throat even though they are not what my position is or what I was trying to communicate.

Not a single question asked of me for clarification, not one. You've shown zero interest in understanding my position. ALL of YOUR behavior is directed toward libelously presenting YOUR false fabricated misinterpretation as mine when it certainly is NOT.

Your behavior is ignorant, immature, and shameful.

Understand that I NEVER advocated FOR anything. That obviously sailed right over your heads.

In hindsight, I should have added clarification but I assumed you two were mature enough to actually ask for it. Was I ever wrong. You two have shown you simply don't have enough intelligence, socialization, or communication skills to ask a single simple question and the reason is because you don't care about the truth. The truth is meaningless to you.

What you really care about is fabricating your own meaning and projecting that fabricated untruth at others.

My meaning is not yours. I'm talking about not taking up arms and fighting against a government that implements birth control in specific areas that face imminent and devastating famine/disease/societal breakdown/etc... due to overpopulation. I used the term "blanket policy" in attempting to communicate that such an implementation should be equitable and not discriminatory. It had no other meaning for me when I said it. That's what I meant.

But again, you two have shown zero interest in understanding my position and 100% interest in fabricating a false position to project at me which, of course, I reject.

Learn how to interview. Learn how to communicate. Learn how to ask a simple question instead of engaging in the ignorant awful behavior you two have chosen to engage in.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

No thanks for piling on Ritter. You made the mistake of accepting THEIR fabrication instead of asking ME for clarification.

NO, my actual position is NOT Malthusian NOR was their fabrication a fair assessment.

His thinking in this case struck me as more Malthusian, but that's a fair assessment.

 

[zone]

You two (Jimmydiggs and zone) are committing libel against me, sinning against me, and acting very foolishly besides. It's impossible to have a real discussion with you about this because you are solely and single-mindedly engaging in those three activities against me with total disregard for understanding what I am actually trying to communicate.

You just don't care what MY meaning is. You have made up your own false interpretations that are not what I meant and are now intent on driving those false interpretations all the way down my throat even though they are not what my position is or what I was trying to communicate.

i kind of asked:

like......this is a joke, right?

AoK?
tell me this is a joke.

i'll wait before totally defriending.

(i'm sure you're being ironic)....right?

you didn't answer or anything.

what you said was pretty clear, but everybody says dumb stuff they regret.
is that what happened?

Not a single question asked of me for clarification, not one. You've shown zero interest in understanding my position. ALL of YOUR behavior is directed toward libelously presenting YOUR false fabricated misinterpretation as mine when it certainly is NOT.

Your behavior is ignorant, immature, and shameful.

Understand that I NEVER advocated FOR anything. That obviously sailed right over your heads.

In hindsight, I should have added clarification but I assumed you two were mature enough to actually ask for it. Was I ever wrong. You two have shown you simply don't have enough intelligence, socialization, or communication skills to ask a single simple question and the reason is because you don't care about the truth. The truth is meaningless to you.

What you really care about is fabricating your own meaning and projecting that fabricated untruth at others.

My meaning is not yours. I'm talking about not taking up arms and fighting against a government that implements birth control in specific areas that face imminent and devastating famine/disease/societal breakdown/etc... due to overpopulation. I used the term "blanket policy" in attempting to communicate that such an implementation should be equitable and not discriminatory. It had no other meaning for me when I said it. That's what I meant.

But again, you two have shown zero interest in understanding my position and 100% interest in fabricating a false position to project at me which, of course, I reject.

Learn how to interview. Learn how to communicate. Learn how to ask a simple question instead of engaging in the ignorant awful behavior you two have chosen to engage in.

calm your show AoK.
i asked you if your shocking remarks were what you really meant.
this post is a rant....and no total "hey that was a stupid thing to say, i never meant it" isn't in this.


anyways....ttyl.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I didn't say anything dumb zone but I agree with you that does happen at times. In this case, a fabrication was invented and misrepresented as mine. Plain and simple. I see now that I did miss your question though. It's been busy around here with the holiday and guests.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I went back and reread my original post. I see that I wasn't clearly communicating what I meant. Sorry for that guys. I should have elaborated. My original post looks pretty bad in hindsight and is not what I was thinking when I typed it. Let's just drop it and move along.

 

[Ritter]

WRONG! You should have asked what I meant if you had a question rather than make up a lie about what I said and wrongly assign the lie you made up to me.

What I said exactly is:

"I'm going to side with you on this issue and say there's more than a desirable number of modern humans on the planet for a truly balanced ecosystem and, of course, the Chinese are responsible for more than their fair share.

Birth control is a desirable and ultimately necessary method for controlling the world's human population and I am not against a blanket state policy of sterilizing both the mother and the father after the first child to achieve that balance."

I NEVER said that "American babies are worth saving, but Chinese babies need to die" nor would I as it's not true, doesn't conform to the Christian teaching of Imago Dei, and I certainly don't believe such a thing. YOU said that. I NEVER did.

I NEVER advocated for abortion which is murder and as a Christian I AM obviously against. I NEVER advocated for infanticide which is murder and as a Christian I AM obviously AGAINST. I NEVER advocated for the death of ANYONE AT ALL PERIOD.

You made up a terrible lie and falsely assigned it to me. Shame on you for doing that.

People, if you have questions just ask. It's that simple.

Please do NOT be so evil as to make up reprehensible lies and then falsely attribute the lies you made up to someone who never said it.

No thanks for piling on Ritter. You made the mistake of accepting THEIR fabrication instead of asking ME for clarification.

NO, my actual position is NOT Malthusian NOR was their fabrication a fair assessment.

What I have highlighted in red certainly qualifies as Malthusian and, if acted upon, something his sociological appliers would have approved.

And no, I am not merely piling on. I disagree with your view that population should be subject to any sort of management outside the logical changes among freely associating people (unlike the 99.9% of other things you have written on this forum). Yeah, it seems like folks have gotten a little out of control, but your original point on this thread was pretty loaded and probably carried implications you didn't intend to make. Implications that didn't appear to clear up even with additional questions.

 

[Ritter]

I went back and reread my original post. I see that I wasn't clearly communicating what I meant. Sorry for that guys. I should have elaborated. My original post looks pretty bad in hindsight and is not what I was thinking when I typed it. Let's just drop it and move along.

And I wasted all that time writing.

 

[jimmydiggs]

I went back and reread my original post. I see that I wasn't clearly communicating what I meant. Sorry for that guys. I should have elaborated. My original post looks pretty bad in hindsight and is not what I was thinking when I typed it. Let's just drop it and move along.

I think proper repentance is due. Not to any of us though.

No offense taken by any of it, other than the moral implications of course. That being said, I'm pretty used to die-hard Democrats saying things like that anyway.

Now we all know there's a little democrat in you

 

[Ritter]

I think proper repentance is due. Not to any of us though.

No offense taken by any of it, other than the moral implications of course. That being said, I'm pretty used to die-hard Democrats saying things like that anyway.

Now we all know there's a little democrat in you

There is a little dem in me too. I'd throw a raucous party at the White House if elected President.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I accept your apology jimmydiggs. Lol.

I think proper repentance is due.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Just out of curiosity Ritter, do you think anything whatsoever should be done to curb the cyclic famine cycles that occur in some parts of the world where they have as many children as possible until the ability to feed them is surpassed after which they literally sit around and watch the babies and children bloat up and die of hunger enmasse until the population decreases to a sustainable level and then in time repeat the cycle?

Forget about what I said. What is your view on this and what do you see as a moral solution (if any)?

I disagree with your view that population should be subject to any sort of management outside the logical changes among freely associating people.

 

[jimmydiggs]

Just out of curiosity Ritter, do you think anything whatsoever should be done to curb the cyclic famine cycles that occur in some parts of the world where they have as many children as possible until the ability to feed them is surpassed after which they literally sit around and watch the babies and children bloat up and die of hunger enmasse until the population decreases to a sustainable level and then in time repeat the cycle?

There are better ways to solve it than to treat children as anything less than what God has said.

Psalm 127:3 bro.

Also, these gals are a tad unconventional by I highly sympathize with Quiverful.

[video=youtube;g6kYNLGb1-4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6kYNLGb1-4[/video]

If God says children are a blessing, why should we treat them as something else?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Is you name Ritter Jimmydiggs? I didn't think so. Please take your off topic comments somewhere else as we all assert children are a blessing in context. What we're discussing is how to deal with overpopulation that results in children dying terrible deaths full of horrible suffering by famine, disease, violent conflict over scarce resources, etc... that result from overpopulation in a given locale.