I find it funny to watch these countries having issues with people not wanting to have babies.
There are core reasons behind this, one large one being “raising a child is expensive and all the world’s money is being sucked up by billionaires, there is nothing left for children”. Another one (for certain countries like Japan and South Korea) is the “work 80 hours a week and never see that family you’re supposed to raise”
And governments go like “sooooo, if we cover child birth, you’re good, right? What? Still nothing? We tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas, how oh how can we solve this?”
Fuck the rich, end the rich. That will get births back to a healthy 2.1
officials have already expanded maternity leave benefits and housing subsidies to encourage couples to have more children.
Seems like they’re trying multiple things. Meanwhile we’re over here trying to say middle school kids can be paid less than minimum wage, operate dangerous machinery and work late on school nights. If you can’t afford kids, might as well exploit them
And then they help pay the roughly $15,000 usd per yr per child it costs to raise a child right?
Becauae it would be really bad if China helped pay for a ton of kids to be born that can’t be provided for.
Kids can pull themselves up by the bootstraps… factories are hiring…
/s
This seems like overcompensating for the child limit. Are they going to be like a yoyo, swinging from one extreme to the other until they find a balance, like all things should be?
No country has increased birth rates sustainably without major coersion. China is still using soft coercion and offering incentives.
the ROI is they get future foot soldiers
They already have a glut of military aged males with no marriage prospects, if they were serious about invading Taiwan, they could only do it now (also aligns with the fact that America has become more isolationist, Japan hasn’t a serious standing army yet etc.)
If they are planning for the future, it’s not military, it’s societal.
It’s great, but I had kind of assumed it was already in place.
China has a far weaker social safety net than a lot of people assume.
That also apparently depends a lot on the particular region’s policies. Which aren’t as centralized as everyone in the West imagines.
Especially considering the pedestal it lives on on Lemmy.
with tankies, they salivate over any news of china, but they would never live there themselves.
Idk I’d live there if I had the chance. The trains seem neat ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I asumed little, but childbirth I thought would.
Average Lemmy White Gwailou has a warped worldview on China
Except me
Nope, you’re cool
I take it they removed the two child limit?
Yes , back in 2021.
they did a long time ago, but thier 1 child policy had generational effect, too little women and too much men ratio, plus other problems like job prospects outside of university(mostly around engineering, and other stems) too much graduates for too small of a pool for jobs.
and the rising COL in the country too, and the CCP trying to lure USA Scientists for job hunting as gotten the netizens incensed. in hindsight chinese citizens arnt having childrens because of that, so ccp might blowing smoke, if they dont solve the underlying issues.(not to mention the evergrande situation happened too.
I also read claims the one-child limit became socially engrained. So even once they lifted it, it was not very socially acceptable
Desperation?
People don’t want to have kids. I wonder why. Remember the laying flat movement and the 996 culture.
I wonder why.
If only there was an actual solution to this LOLOL…
If I lived under an authoritarian regime, I would not want to bring a child into it.
lived under an authoritarian regime
I mean… isn’t that just most of history tbh?
Most people aren’t antinatalists lol
I’d quibble that the average medieval peasant faced a lot less surveillance than the average citizen of any country today (Though perhaps that’s just a change in methods).
But you are right - and, in fact, I think it’s the case that countries/people in worse circumstances tend to have more kids (probably some weird evolutionary thing but I don’t want to speculate). As tough as times may seem in “developed” countries, most people don’t need to worry about where their next meal is coming from.
(This isn’t to say that circumstances are “fine” or that we shouldn’t improve things - simply pointing out some biological factors). It’s also worth noting that folks in worse economic circumstances tend to having a higher number of people in their “support network” (friends and family - ie, 3 generations living under one roof). Though perhaps this is not the case in the US since it’s culturally looked down upon to rely on family like that.
It’s an interesting phenomenon that can’t be boiled down to 1 or 2 simple factors like government type. Maybe this was too much text and I should’ve just said “I agree with you DeathByBigSad”
having a higher number of people in their “support network” (friends and family - ie, 3 generations living under one roof).
Fun fact: My mom told me that, supposedly, if it weren’t for the fact that my maternal grandmother (aka: her mother) agree to help take care of me, she would’ve never given birth to me, as she already has the trouble of dealing with my older brother. My parents were kinda busy with work.
(I’m from China btw… Currently residing in the US)
I also remember sometimes my older brother was just tasked with the “chore” of having to pick me up. I remember once my mom’s close friend picked me up from school at the same time as she picked up her kid, I kinda just spent like an hour at their house being bored… not much entertainment… smartphones didn’t exist at the time (not that I would’ve been allowed to have one anyways, I was like maybe 10 or something).
And as for finacial support. My mom borrowed a lot of money from relatives and friends… so yeah… that how she managed to buy a house (she eventually paid them back).
I live in a democracy and don’t want to bring children into this.
I agree, but how is that relevant to China? It pretty consistently has the highest government satisfaction rates in the world.
Edit: and before you accuse me of Chinese propaganda, that’s data from western organizations like Pew Research or Ash Institute
Because they jail/disappear anyone who complains? Lol.
Edit: Without entrenched freedom of speech, surveys mean nothing but what respondants think their opressors want to hear.
Damn. Americans jail even more people and still have a lower satisfaction…
Dumb take. The data portraying that comes from western institutions like Pew Research or the Ash Institute
You seem to struggle with the simple concept. So badly in fact, that I suspect this is all disingenuous bullshit from a bad faith ideologue.
In the slight chance this is just a high level of ignorance, naievety or low IQ, here is my polite response.
Oppressed people won’t tell anyone anything that can be used against them, western or not. Pew Research isn’t going to protect them. The Ash institute won’t un-disapear anyone. The people speaking to western, even academic sources still have to live under oppression when the survey is done.
Speaking to foreign journalist is a great way to get your family threatened.
https://rsf.org/en/chinese-regime-s-fierce-repression-journalists-hidden-behind-day-celebration
Edit: Never mind. For bad faith arguments I hereby award you a personal block.
Quoting RSF, the western politicized organization that refused to comment on the illegal arbitrary detention of a Spanish journalist in Poland. The organization classifying England’s “Press Freedom Index” as satisfactory while all sorts of reporters bring up the massive repression against anti-zionism in all media. Surely that Montpellier-based organization with branches exclusively in western countries could not be used as a political tool!
You have literally never spoken to a Chinese person living in China, and it shows.
Oppressed people won’t tell anyone anything that can be used against them, western or not
Look. I understand you’ve been exposed to decades of anti-China propaganda, but this is fucking wild. In my university department I’ve been fortunate enough to direct the master’s and bachelor’s theses of some 10 Chinese students. I’ve discussed politics with most of them, between 2020 and 2024 for a frame of reference. We’re talking highly trained young men and women from a variety of backgrounds and provinces. None of them has had any problem talking to me about politics, other than “I’m not really interested” for some of them. Out of those students, only one chose to pursue a career in Germany (highly developed, rich country in Europe), the rest moved back to “authoritarian, evil, oppressive” China.
The one who chose to stay in Germany told me that he came to Europe considering himself an opposition supporter against the government of China, but that when he saw the politics in Europe, he started to be a lot more charitative towards the Chinese government and he’s not so clear about his position anymore. Another student told me she couldn’t understand how the German government did nothing while hundreds of thousands of citizens were needlessly dying of COVID because it didn’t want to infringe too much on “the economy”.
Tell me now: how many actually Chinese people living in China have you spoken with?
The truth is that the strength of a democracy has little relation to the birth rate. If you live in the US, for example, you only live in a democracy if your income is in the top 10%. This has actually been studied. The opinions of the poorest 90% of the population have absolutely zero bearing on what government policy is implemented.
The US and China actually have similar levels of democracy. China forms all its policies from the CCP, an organization of about 100 million people. The share of the population in China that has any impact on policy is actually quite similar to the share that does the same in the US.
It’s true. The very poor people I’ve known in the US have believed that “the system is rigged” and they have little freedom and no voice. They believe they are exploited by powers far beyond their ability to challenge and the last way any of it would ever change is through voting, which they see as an empty, farcical gesture.
While you are correct, taking a piss poor example of democracy against another piss poor example of democracy doesn’t really explain anything. I said authoritarian regime, I stand by that.
What democracy currently have population replacement birth levels?
All the ones in Europe (if you count them as democratic obviously)
I think you’re imagining that statistics, because they do not. But hey, let’s check. Name three European countries that have population replacement birth levels.
I never said democracy equals replacement level birthrate.
No, but your comment implies it would be higher, even if that wasn’t your intention.
Do you want to discuss things with the public, or do you want to debate the voices in your head and the things they told you I said.
Ehh, the character of the regime doesn’t seem to affect birth rates a whole lot. Brutal dictatorships that make China seem like a gentle puppy could have perfectly ok birth rates. E.g. Nazi Germany had 2.5 fertility rate in 1939 and 1940, it was their highest since 1922: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Germany
I really don’t think the average Chinese cares too much about how authoritarian their govt is when it comes to deciding on whether to have kids. The consequences of one-child policy, economic prospects, stability, general cultural optimism/pessimism, social habits (and the effects of technology on them), etc. are all likely to be much more important factors.
The consequences of one-child policy, economic prospects, stability, general cultural optimism/pessimism, social habits (and the effects of technology on them), etc. are all likely to be much more important factors.
Those are all directly and heavily influenced by an authoritarian regime, so in the exhale you disagree with me, while on the inhale you argue my point. ;)
Those are all directly and heavily influenced by all regimes in general, aside from the one-child policy which might be regarded as an authoritiarian policy. Shit economy making people not want kids works the same both in democracies and in authoritarian countries (in fact, the latter might even dampen the negative psychological effects upon the population through propaganda).
[The shitpost formerly here is a good reminder to not Lemmy when too drunk. Know your limits]
It must be fun when you just make up what the other person said and call them names over that. You homophobe.
[The shitpost formerly here is a good reminder to not Lemmy when too drunk. Know your limits]
Imperialist shill.
“Oh I hope my children grow up in an authoritarian dumpster fire. Rights are scary and I can’t be trusted with them.”
- you, probably.
Or maybe somewhere where you don’t have to spend half of your salary paying rent? Like China.
I laughed pretty hard reading this when Hong Kong’s subdivided flats (cage appartments) came to mind.
You bring up an interesting topic. China has both housing affordability issues, and entire ghost cities at the same time.
China’s command economy can accomplish amazing feats in little time, at the cost of efficiency and utility.
Children in China have better lives than those in the US.
And you’re mad about it.
personable as always, .ml
As someone currently in China, I’d rather have a kid here than in the US.
There’s a lot more random shit explicitly for children around, like malls will have basketball courts, arcades, playgrounds, and other things that definitely doesn’t generate as much, if any revenue, so kids aren’t just expected to silently follow their parents around or be on the phone for hours at a time. As a consequence, you see fewer outbursts of children in public. They still have a long way to go regarding mental health in other ways. A mother I talked to was confused that anyone could think it’s possible to teach children to listen without hitting them.
As far as education goes, I see more small, private schools than the US, which worries me as it implies the public schools in the area aren’t as good. It’s notoriously stressful for the children, but then so is living with a real danger of getting shot at school.
thanks for your actually sensible and cogent input.
it’s hard for me to understand how private schools can exist in China. i have a difficult time understanding how they balance / navigate between socialism and capitalism.
i would never raise my children in the US. the US has too many problems. we’re quite happy in the EU. as you say, lots of children and family friendly public spaces around, and even as a part of private places they set aside spots for kids without cost.
HCOL, many graduates are having impossible time of finding jobs, plus china trying to lure graduates/phd from the states has incensed them as well.
Good thing they made actual unions illegal in the Workers’ Paradise ™️.
Whenever I see that, I love to remind people, than Tienanmen Protesta were (partly) against China pivot from communism to capitalism - this article summarizes it nicely: https://jacobin.com/2019/06/tiananmen-square-worker-organization-socialist-democracy
Anything to help people that want to have children is good.
nah, disagree. not anything.
that want to have children
As long as people who don’t want to have children aren’t pressured. Not everyone is interested in parenting, and that needs to be accepted.
China isn’t good about things like that. They have billions of people, they aren’t going to worry about the feelings of those not contributing to the machine.
How have you taken a good thing for people and turned it into a bad thing for you.
Can’t you just be happy for others without making it about yourself?
China is not doing this out of kindness or altruism in any respects. They don’t care about people wanting to have kids. They’re doing it because they need more poor people to keep working and replenishing the poor workers, to prop up the elite class. Why can’t you see this?
Not isolated to China. Most western countries including the US have the same goals, it’s not altruistic.
Yes, there is real concern that measures to prop up birth rates might become coercive. That people may feel pressured to reproduce whether they want to or not.
there is real concern
By who?
people may feel pressured
There is nothing the cpc could do that would register compared to the pressure exerted by the average parent.
You don’t foresee governments being capable of engaging in coercive, if not outright totalitarian measures?
As a simple hypothetical example: consider the effect of banning (or otherwise significantly restricting) contraceptives.
Governments? Yes. China specifically? Probably not. Korea maybe, because they’ve been having some extremely normal politics as of late.
Chinese dudes I’ve talked to have lamented the contradictory pressure and social requirements of getting married, I can’t predict what kind of policy would help address this. Promoting gay marriage and adoption? Telling parents it’s fine if everyone doesn’t get married? Housing subsidies for grandparents to move nearby and provide childcare so a smaller dowry is acceptable? Letting immigrants on spouse visas work?
The women I’ve talked to have mostly lamented the same bullshit women everywhere deal with, dudes cheating or being unwilling to put in the same effort. IDK if these concerns will result in policy changes.
Sure but that’s a totally different discussion than the other commentor making it about themselves
I don’t live in China, so this isn’t about me.
Did you hurt yourself making that stretch?
Exactly it’s not about you.
So why are you commenting that some people DONT WANT KIDS and this shouldnt be forced on us.
You are making it about yourself.
The only person trying to make it about me is…you.
Quit trying to make it happen, and stop with the fucking gaslighing.
The original comment was
“Anything that helps people that want to have children is good”
Your response was
“As long as people who don’t want to have children aren’t pressured. Not everyone is interested in parenting, and that needs to be accepted.”
At no point was anyone’s talking about forcing people to have kids. You’ve built a strawman and are arguing about something that nobody is talking about.
You. You have made it about yourself and are now trying to pretend you didn’t.
Yeah, the guy you’re talking to took “anything” and started talking about some hypothetical rapist government when the original comment clearly says “people that want to have children.”
Swing. And a miss
Given how overpopulated the planet is, I’m not a fan
It’s the planet’s own fault for allowing life in the first place
I mean there is only one planet we know of that has life, why shouldn’t it be infested with it
Childbirth costs isn’t what’s preventing people from having babies though
You’re right, falling birth rates are affecting people in rich and poor countries alike.
I think the answer is more complicated and has a lot to do with our collective psychology as a species, what we’re consuming and what we’re feeling about our futures.
That said, money and cost do play a huge role in this. People have complicated feelings on having families right now, and the barrier of cost is a great idea for the brain to seize onto as a validation for avoiding continuation of the species.
In China even high schools are paid, the answer is not complicated in this case. It’s just crazy expensive to have children in China with the local salaries
They subsidize a lot more than childbirth
pixelated porn?
I agree with this in the basis of the thought. But depending on the social security in various countries there are groups that abuse this help. So I’m hoping that loopholes are plugged at the same time.
That kind of thinking is what stops the US from implementing any kind of decent social programs. If your first concern is ppl taking advantage of it you’re not really concerned with helping ppl
Yeah, when I support a social program, it’s with the knowledge and acceptance that some abuse will occur. It’s just that I think, despite the abuse, the upside is still a superior outcome to not doing it at all. Maybe one day we’ll rebuild the cultural fabric to the point where people don’t feel so desperate they immediately exploit any crack in the system regardless of the risks or long-term outcomes. With changes in culture and wealth distribution worldwide, I believe global prosperity is absolutely possible.
I can’t imagine welfare of any kind is more abused than the process by which the US government farms things out to private companies. If the poor are suckling at the teet of the welfare cow, then private industry is the wolf ripping it’s head off. Just look at the clusters of contractors that show up like flies on shit any time the money faucet is opened.
Yeah, I want my neighbors to have heat in the winter, food when they lose their job, and universal childcare. If I have to pay a few extra bucks a year for that it’s better than pouring it into the rest of the money-holes in Washington DC.
OP mentions being from another country. I don’t have a ton of experience with countries commonly regarded as corrupt, though I did go to Nigeria once; money flows >>differently<< there. But there’s also a stronger social fabric. I don’t know if I could vote for any tax when there is suck a blatant track record of shady dealings (though it’s arguable we’ve all been doing that). It was fascinating and I hope to go back some day.
I’m not from the US… Not by far. Where I’m from many people abuse the system by having an exorbitant amount of children (10+), get free kindergarten care, extra money, don’t work, don’t contribute to society, steal, cause issues, etc.
Are you familiar with the term “anecdote”?
This policy that would help hundreds of millions of people could potentially be abused by thousands!
It might help someone I don’t like!
Those who advocate means testing deserve nothing at all
How could you abuse this? If I have a child and get my medical costs covered, I don’t get any additional benefits if I ditch the child.
That seems somewhat unfair towards people with other interests who aren’t being subsidized.
Lol, and BangCrash went out of their way to be offended by my comment in this post.
BTW, I’m not attacking you and don’t really care. I just feel that I was unfairly singled out.
Sadly, when it comes down to it, children are necessary for society to function long-term. They are the people who will be financing and effecting your retirement, at least in a well-functioning society. I think it is a sound policy to make sure people can have children without any unnecessary suffering, there’s plenty of necessary suffering in there already.
Nah, human fucking can’t be stopped but even if 99% of the human race was sterile for a geneation the earth would still have more humans left on it than the vast majority of recorded history.
Modern nations should be supporting population declines.
Sadly, when it comes down to it, children are necessary for society to function long-term.
It shouldn’t be sad, this is basic reality. We should love kids and want kids and pressure our own countries to make it easier to have families.
I am really getting worried that the left broadly is turning soft anti-natalist and there is no faster way to end your movement than by not having more people. I feel like “birth rates” and “fertility” are terms that we feel have been co-opted by the right because figures like Elon Musk and the manosphere bros.
How many humans should we aim to have, long term? 20 billion? 50 billion? We’re already on track to reach 10 billion in the next 25 years.
I believe that as a society, we should have a long-term plan and a goal for our species’s population count, because simply offering incentives for continued growth in order to continue funding generational gaps in our pyramid scheme of social welfare is untenable. Ultimately we will reach the logistical capacity of a functional welfare state, to say nothing of all the other problems.
We probably won’t ever hit 11 billion contiguous humans. At least not without colonizing Venus. The birthrates worldwide are dropping quickly, and every time another country passes through the Industrial Age, into the Modern Age, their birthrates fall off a cliff. I suspect we will eventually stabilize around 9 billion people, which is a few billion lower than the maximum projected sustainable population of The Earth.
How many humans should we aim to have, long term? 20 billion? 50 billion?
That’s not what this issue is about, this isn’t “pro-growth” this is about averting economic and logistical collapse across much of the developed world.
Sure, we could do with a reduced population, but it needs to be reduced slowly enough that we don’t see mass casualties and so that our infrastructure, production and logistics aren’t suddenly unmanned, or many, many people will suffer.
We have to understand that the argument for continued population upkeep is about stability not some desire to perpetually increase population. There’s not a sharp, two-sided binary here, the problem is that many, many people in the developed world are having either no kids or not enough to keep up with expected decline and longer lifespans. When we run out of young people to run our cities, our roads, our offices and our shipyards and rail systems, we end up with collapse.
Look into South Korea for a vision of the worst case and think about what will happen broadly when the same syndrome hits other major world powers and logistical hubs.
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees. Continuing to fixate on short-term problems like bridging a generational gap—which incidentally we’ve survived many times in anthropological history—by continuing policies with long-term ramifications is not a good plan.
At some point we need to come to terms with the fact that continuous population growth is not tenable. Whether the population cap is 10 billion or 100 billion, the fact of the matter is that we will eventually hit it. We can’t keep procrastinating because we’re unwilling to resolve the challenges you’ve mentioned in a more effective manner.
Call me an optimist, but if we’re unable to change our habits as a species, perhaps a well-needed revolution will kick us into action.
You and people who raise this notion are all for rapid depopulation when you aren’t imagining it’s you dealing with the impact of billions of people not having enough resources. It sounds a bit entitled.
China is thinking long-term and practical. If they lose their young work-force it won’t matter what those “other people” are doing or not.
Someone in China told me once that one of the biggest differences between China and Europe/USA is that in the west we think in terms of years or decades. In China they are making plans for the next several centuries.
This isn’t a glowing endorsement of the heinous shit China has done, but it should at least make you understand that this isn’t a social welfare program designed to help families as much as the first of many measures to fight the forces that are eroding the power and production capability of other countries. If you want to see how bad it can get, look into what the future holds for South Korea.
years or decades.
Let’s face it, in neoliberal democracies we barely think past the next quarter. Next election cycle at the most!
I would love a government with a long term outlook rather than one that is concerned only with getting re-elected or failing that getting a cushy job with one of their “donors” after they leave office
Good. Can’t wait to beat this drum to hopefully shame the less than useless US congress to do ANYTHING.
I mean, shaming America’s greatness against other countries has worked in the past. That’s how we got:
- Universal healthcare
- Mandated paid maternity/parental leave
- More than two dominant political parties
- Cheaper or free college education
- High-speed passenger rail
- Mandated annual paid vacation time
Oh wait.
The Congress of today likely won’t. But the people who takes their vacated seats? Possibly.
Judging by the two-party system and the past Democrat governments, I don’t think there’s a significant possibility of getting more than one those in the next decade. At least four of them run directly in contradiction to the groups with enough money to systematically sponsor and corrupt politicians (no matter which party), own mass media and control other relevant institutions.
These kind of things only happen when people have the power to pressure the government into supplying them.
From Bars, Pride and dating apps: How China is closing down its LGBT+ spaces
At the same time, China’s population growth and economy are slowing. “The current population growth couldn’t support economic growth,” explains Hongwei, meaning there has been a push to encourage heterosexual couples to have larger families to ensure an abundant future workforce.
China: be less homo and breed more
The ban on Grindr could be put down to China’s wider dislike of Western apps, which are often accused of being vehicles for foreign influence. But removing Blued and Finka, which were both developed in China, represents a “seismic change in government attitudes towards homegrown LGBT apps”, says Hongwei.
Before targeting Blued and Finka, the Chinese authorities led a campaign against authors of the “Boy’s Love”, or Danmei, same-sex romance stories, some of which feature explicit love scenes between men.
Several Danmei writers, most of whom are female, have reported being arrested and questioned by the authorities, and in recent months two major Danmei sites have either shut down, or drastically reduced and toned down their content.
Today, “officially, those Three No’s are still in place, but we are seeing evidence that the space for LGBT+ communities is starting to shrink”, says Marc Lanteigne, associate professor of political science at the Arctic University of Norway.
Shanghai Pride shut down in 2020, and one year later the government shut down student LGBT+ accounts for “violating internet regulations”. Grindr disappeared in 2022, and in 2023 the Beijing LGBT Centre closed its doors after 15 years.
In June 2024, the Roxie, Shanghai’s last officially lesbian bar, was forced to close “under pressure from the authorities".
“The authorities have been slowly chipping away at those spaces that were open previously,” says Hildebrandt.
With the closure of so many physical spaces, online networks had become “really the only places in which many members of the LGBT+ community could express their sexuality openly” he adds.
But in contemporary Chinese politics, “the Maoist principles about equality have more to do with uniformity,” says Hildebrandt. “You gain equality by being more like everybody else. You don’t gain equality by being diverse.”
In a bid to create greater conformity within the population, “there has been a push in China to reinforce traditional family values and, in some cases, traditional masculine values,” adds Lanteigne.
Since the Covid pandemic, “the Chinese government has endorsed nationalist discourse and LGBT culture is seen as very politicised siding with Western ideologies”, says Hongwei.
“There’s the impression that LGBTQ communities are by default connected to the West and could be seen as destabilising forces,” adds Lanteigne.
Broader political and social forces may be at work, but the result is a real loss of liberty for gay and queer people in China. Hildebrandt says: “There is a real sense that it’s become a more difficult environment to be openly gay."
If we close gay bars, gay people will be straight right?
The notion of homosexuality as a sexual orientation didn’t exist until recently.
People had gay relationships and did gay sex but they’d also tend to get married and pump out a kid or two. I’m assuming while being gay on the side.
Maybe the answer is less about punishing homosexuality than it is about applying extreme social pressure on monogamy?
IMO monogamy does more damage to society than all the gay in the known universe ever possibly could. The fact that homosexuality doesn’t do any damage at all, really, is a factor as well.
BUT.
AT.
WHAT.
COST!
Yeah! Why would China spend that money on their people when they could spend it on their military and use their military to harass brown countries?
I mean, China does also spend on their military and harass brown countries.
https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1786968298636423210
Every time China visits we get a hospital, every time Britain visits we get a lecture
Whataboutism.
China is #2 in military spending after the USA.
As for harassing brown people: well there’s the whole Uyghur thing. And the simmering fight with other countries over islands in the South China sea.
Two things can be bad. These are not sports teams where one side wins and the other loses.
Two things can be bad. These are not sports teams where one side wins and the other loses.
Yes. I completely agree. However, it’s important to dispel false equivalence. Every country spends money on military, that doesn’t imply they’re all bad or neglecting their citizens.
Why is the US spending so much on military? Why is China spending so much on military? Why does the US routinely invade countries in other regions? Why does China suppress Uyghur people in the Xinjiang conflict? Like you said, two things can be bad, but it’s also negligent to imply the two situations are comparable.
China is #2 in military spending after the USA.
I don’t believe they have another option, given the USA’s military and aggression.
It’s telling how limited their spending is - consider China’s disproportionate economy, size and population, and their borders. According to Wikipedia, they only spend 1.7% of their GDP on military - that’s alongside the Netherlands, Czechia, Italy and Spain.
Yeah that’s the thing. USA and China are both bad, sometimes due to the same thing (imperialism, capitalism, cronies running things etc), sometimes for unique things. Saying one country is good doesn’t make the other bad in the same domain. And vice versa.
However it is extremely important and necessary to compare things. Like you have compared military spending between different countries. The USA’s manifest destiny CAN be compared to the Han supremacy in China especially in Tibet and Xinjiang. But of course there are marked differences.
China is #2 in military spending after the USA.
China plus the next 13 countries on the list can’t total US military spending. And I don’t even know if Israel + Ukraine should count, given how much of their military budget is just US foreign aid.
As for harassing brown people: well there’s the whole Uyghur thing.
The original “evidence” of 1 million Uyghurs in concentration camps stems from US propaganda outlets and far-right “researchers” like Adrian Zenz. These numbers could not be independently verified, and other media sources that repeat these claims merely cite each other or this original, US-backed research. Zenz himself is a known antisemitic conspiracy theorist, far-right evangelical, and Islamophobe who has written that the Jews who refuse to convert to Christianity will be wiped out by God in a “fiery furnace”. Why would a German with such hateful views toward Jews and Muslims be such a champion of Uyghur rights? It was later found that Zenz had received $625,000 from Donald Trump’s Chief Strategist Steve Bannon to help him fabricate the story of Uyghur genocide.
Brother, you are sucking from the tailpipe of propaganda while your country is drowning in the blood of native peoples.
Except… there is actual evidence… And Amnesty International verified the human right abuses independently.
The CCP even acknowledged the existence of, what they like to call, “re-education camps”.
You’re denying gross violations of human rights by an Imperial regime.
there is actual evidence…
Satellite imagery and open-source geographic data
Buddy…
Amnesty International verified the human right abuses independently.
Thanks for that
Nice genocide denial.
Also I’m not American nor pro-American.
genocide denial
Brother, get your ass to Afghanistan and say that to any of the survivors of the US occupation.
You don’t care what genocide is. You just want some foreigner to eat your sins.
Also I’m not American
Did you clap for Yaroslav Hunka with the rest of your ilk?
It’s like if 200 million of China workforce were gig workers or something.
does this apply if one of the parents was not chinese?
Probably not. Probably need a certain social credit score and last name
Please learn how the ‘social credit’ system actually works before spouting off
In the US, we just call our social credit scores credit scores.
Our credit scores don’t stop you from traveling
What you’re thinking of is actually only applicable after a court judgment in China and it’s for judgment defaulters, i.e. people who have violated the law, received an order to pay a fine from the court (a judgment), and then proceeded to either evade the fine or hide their assets. It’s restricted to people who are within their means to pay the judgment and are still refusing or evading, and it’s limited to high consumption or consumption not essential to life/work. They can still travel, they just can’t buy plane tickets and nicer rail tickets or high speed rail. The government uses the restrictions to encourage people to pay their fines. The US and (I assume) western countries do similar things with judgments and bankruptcies all the time. In the US a court judgment is typically required to be paid off when you sell your home or before a lender will let you refinance your property, for example. Also a bankruptcy court can effectively restrict your right to purchase luxury items or travel or by scrutinizing your funds in court and requiring that you show up to certain court dates, just as examples. They can even refuse to let you sell your house and other assets and set stipulations for how debt must be repaid if they do let you sell it. The social credit score stuff is nonsense that’s long since been debunked or has Western equivalents that we don’t bat an eye at.
A good credit score won’t qualify you for a free birth in the USA. But a bad one might!
… in a blue state.
Social credit scores only apply to companies 😭
If they’re are covered, why or how are they out of pocket?
I think once they are covered, they will no longer be uncovered. I.e. no longer be out of pocket.
Still you have to pay to raise them, which I’m guessing is the main factor for people not to want children. Which I suppose is what the government is trying to encourage here.
They don’t have universal healthcare?
Also DYK China now has a 3 child policy. Maximum, that is.
The only thing that’s free in the people’s hospital is walking in the door.
But it is all very cheap, I got an xray, ultrasound, and consult for like 15 USD. Cuba seems to have a better model regarding healthcare.
Good to know. Sounds like token pricing to prevent abuse.
Its not quite that cheap, remember that wages here are much lower. OTC meds are often more expensive than in America, and TCM is sold alongside actual medicine
Even quadruple that it’s still token. More and it’s still cheap.
TCM?
Traditional Chinese Medicine. It comes in pillboxes that look exactly like actual medicine, but then you translate the ingredients and it has like bear bile and shit.
I wish the USA did. Quiverfull is a bane.
no… they canceled that, and now want you to pop out as many slaves as possible
no… they canceled that
This shit is so easy to check before you click “reply” I have no idea why we can’t be asked to spend several seconds on a basic google search before spilling whatever is on our mind. You can hate China for whatever reasons, but let’s not share factually incorrect information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-child_policy
edit: why am I not at all surprised your mod history is filled with hate towards Asian people.
They removed the fines, so it’s a decriminalization, which is practically just legalizing having as many kids as you want.
no that was in 2021. they removed it now… and literally want you to pop out as many labour slaves as possible:
btw I would upvote you if you were right, but no they removed the 3-children cap. Also btw im not anti china, and actually all my political and humanright views have bias favoring african and asian countries… and especially 3rd world and developing countries. so sorry i dont know what comment i left that made you get that wrong about me
I think I’m going to trust the reporting from actual people in China over someone who’s moderation comment I can fucking SEE so don’t pretend shit around me. I will never see your stupid comments again.
what’s comment moderation? how can I see it for each user?
regarding the subject. your sources are better if you rely on people from china. though all online resources say those three-child restrictions have been ignored:
https://www.chinalegalexperts.com/news/how-many-kids-can-you-have-in-china
so you’re right about what the official law is thats all.
Why would they bother checking themselves when it’s easier to post misinformation and wait for someone to correct it?
