China as a Super Power

Spartan95 said:

The 2010 population census puts PRC's population at 1.37 billion. This is a growth of 0.57 percent (73.9 million) over the 2000 census population.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The increasing disparity in the male-female ratios has been described by demographers as a ticking time bomb as this will mean that in time to come, males will outnumber females by the millions.

Click to expand...

It already is a problem, but I don't think there's too much to worry about. As the 50 million male surplus is the result of a few cross-generations of males, such as the Baby Boomers and Gen X, this means that the problems are only limited to the groups of this longitude. If the practice of female-babies killings had ceased in modern times, particularly from late '80s and on, then this means the gender ratio for the generations from then on should be back to normal. With that said, that means these extra male population problems are only limited to those specific age groups. With their mortality approaching, the problem dies with them.

In my opinion, there are only 2 possible outcomes:
1. These surplus men will venture overseas to spread their seeds elsewhere, or
2. Darwin takes care of them and they die off without a woman, thus no families to spread the seeds; this means the problem also ceases there with these lonely old men registering on the death list.

If there are 1 sausage for every 1 egg to create a breakfast combo, the world(or the firm, for any business-oriented minds) won't stop just because this month the world produced extra 50 sausages; the other months for the rest of the year continue on producing the normal output, thus the 50 sausage surplus was only the problem for that specific month. Since everything biological will expire, therefore as soon as those sausages expire, there won't be a problem anymore. (those extra sausages won't continue to pass on the problem, which is something people should note)

IronsightSniper said:

3. Projecting power on a global scale, is conventionally done with a Navy. Sure, an ICBM can go anywhere, but it's very hard to show people your brand new Dong Feng. However, something along the lines of a "Great White Fleet" will project power anywhere in the world, as long as that fleet can get there. China does not have a Great White Fleet. The PLAN is focused mainly on it's traditional task (and historical one) of protecting the Chinese shores from Foreign attack. The PLAN however, does not have the Ships or the Logistics to actually sail a fleet and project power to nations abroad. It fails here.

Click to expand...

Power projection is more of an american construct.
Soviet/Russia never had the kind of power projection like American, or even Britain or France. And yet Soviet was one of the two defacto superpowers of cold war era.

Asymptote said:

Naval power projection is more of an american construct.
Soviet/Russia never had the kind of power projection liken to American, or even Britain or France. And yet Soviet was one of the defacto superpower of cold war era.

Click to expand...

Agreed, it's also demonstrates the evolution of warfare with the advance of technology, leading into game-changing of geopolitics.

airsuperiority said:

It already is a problem, but I don't think there's too much to worry about. As the 50 million male surplus is the result of a few cross-generations of males, such as the Baby Boomers and Gen X, this means that the problems are only limited to the groups of this longitude. If the practice of female-babies killings had ceased in modern times, particularly from late '80s and on, then this means the gender ratio for the generations from then on should be back to normal. With that said, that means these extra male population problems are only limited to those specific age groups. With their mortality approaching, the problem dies with them.

Click to expand...

From what I understand of this issue, the male-female gender gap is increasing with the younger generation due to the combination of 3 factors:

1. The 1 child policy
2. The desire to have a son to carry on the family name
3. The ability to determine the sex of the baby early in the pregnancy

As a result, female babies get aborted while male babies don't get aborted.

There have been various reports about this gender gap in the younger generation with the most dramatic being a class in PRC where there is 1 girl for every 4 boys in a particular town (can't remember which town though).

This is anecdotal and there is no official figure for how large the gap is in different age groups. I would think that the most recent census would have compiled these figures.

However, releasing the figures publicly is a different issue.

airsuperiority said:

In my opinion, there are only 2 possible outcomes:
1. These surplus men will venture overseas to spread their seeds elsewhere, or
2. Darwin takes care of them and they die off without a woman, thus no families to spread the seeds; this means the problem also ceases there with these lonely old men registering on the death list.

Click to expand...

1 of the emerging trends to cope with this gender gap is to source for brides from overseas (aka "mail order brides"). Vietnam is often mentioned. And occasionally DPRK.

It is no surprise a topic regarding China would touch on the illusive title of "super power" and even more illusive population problem.

For the record, ordinary Chinese citizens don't give a damn of the title "super power" - given, or taken.

It is not Chinese people don't care about international political topics (we are more enthusiasm than you can imagine, not only for on-line committees); it is not that Chinese people don't feel the weight of Chinese society getting more involved to the outside world; it is even not because Chinese people don't know how powerful (in depth acknowledge) the military, technology, talent prowess, China wields these days...

It is simply THAT TITLE do not matter.

One example is that when the world having night long talkings about China being No.2 economic power, Chinese people ourselves don't even have intrest to spend time on this matter (talking).

I think in a rather philosophical description, China is more like "steady walks along the path to glory", rather than "rising to power".

And to touch less politic as possible, while still talking a little about Chinese "population issue", I say this:

Take a look at history, Chinese civilization, NEVER have had a 100:100 kind of sex ratio, throughout times (troubled times, or steady times). And be it big or small, social unrest never caused by gender gap difference as far as I can recall (usurping ruling under occupation like mongols, that mongol lords can taking over the brids' first night... let's not count).

The "family planning policy" (unlike the intentionally called "one child policy" by news-brokers of the west), is a full-set-package of planning policy national-wise, short as 少生，优生，优育. That taking consideration of "give birth" and "genetical-optimal birth" (don't marry your sister, kind of education); and "raise the child with optimal efforts"... while some other civilizations fail to figure out "pet dog and least loving child, which one is more important?", Chinese utilizing the millennial accumulated wisdoms to let the people (population, more precisely in this topic) to ADAPT, on their own.

Modern technial achivement DOSE have an impact on the "abortion options", when families are making their planning... but the idea of "gender gap caused by modern abortion capability" - is simply a successful news-broking, rather than science fact. In fact, if anyone is more interest on reading, you can read out what "climatical reasons" have far more impact, on the gender-birth issues.

And once again back to the "super power" topic, we really (generally) have not have the appetite to CARE ABOUT that crown, like OTHERS dose.

Red__Sword, well said, action is greater then words. Besides the Yuan dynasty, China is basely a local power center around Asia and a major international trading partner thru the silk road and the waterway ( Ming fleet ) IMO.

I have not met a single of my fellow Chinese relatives that have the notion of "Conquering the World", the only fear I can sense is never to be push around by the rest of world like back in the Qing dynasty (1644-1912).

Mashan said:

Red__Sword, well said, action is greater then words. Besides the Yuan dynasty, China is basely a local power center around Asia and a major international trading partner thru the silk road and the waterway ( Ming fleet ) IMO.

I have not met a single of my fellow Chinese relatives that have the notion of "Conquering the World", the only fear I can sense is never to be push around by the rest of world like back in the Qing dynasty (1644-1912).

Click to expand...

Why the "Yuan Dynasty"and not the "Qin Dynasty" when much of what is China proper was unified?

In addition to the gender imbalance, the other demographic ticking time bomb is aging. Rapid declines in fertility from the 1960s to present created a bulge of working age population. This is known as the "demographic dividend" that helps develop countries. The problem is that once those bulge retires or becomes too old or sick to work, they create a huge drain on the economy. The West and Japan are experiencing this now with pension systems funded by taxes on the working age population. When the ratio of taxpayers to beneficiaries shrinks, problems arise.

China does not have the kind of generous, pay-as-you-go pension systems of the West or Japan. In China, working age children take care of their parents. Combined with the One Child Policy, that means one child has to shoulder the burden of taking care of both their parents. Not well thought-out plan, that One Child Policy. So when that bulge of population begins to retire or can no longer work, that is a huge drain on the population. The government will still be bearing the load because when people retire they stop paying taxes but continue consuming government services like public transportation which is subsidized, and even more so for seniors. Health is another is huge expense for the elderly as developed nations are discovering.

The solution to this is dump the One Child Policy ASAP and reverse course to aggressively promote large families. Each generation should be larger than on the one it supports in order to avoid over-burdening the working age population. China reversed course on population policy once before, from promoting large families during the Mao era to discouraging them. Mao got a lot of things wrong but growing the population was one of his better policies.

Well if they dump the one child policy then wouldn't the investment in one child decrease wouldn't that loose the quality unless they are willing to increase the education spending from 1.9% to like 5%.

Good thing is china can keep holding the title of most populated country in the world since the beginning of civilization.

Personally I think a smaller population is good thing it may shrink overall GDP, but it allows the living standards to improve by person to person basis. China is despite being larger than USA its not 4x the size of it. Even 2x the size I am sure there will be still a cast pool of labor especially from gender imbalance. True it makes it harder for socialization but its always been akin to a ponzi scheme.