China’s Demographic Time Bomb
Tags: Culture of Life.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
Remember, yesterday, when I pointed out an anti-human article advocating that the whole world go on China’s evil “one child” policy? Well, here’s the kicker:
Wang Weijia and her husband grew up surrounded by propaganda posters lecturing them that “Mother Earth is too tired to sustain more children” and “One more baby means one more tomb.”
They learned the lesson so well that when Shanghai government officials, alarmed by their city’s low birthrate and aging population, abruptly changed course this summer and began encouraging young couples to have more than one child, their reaction was instant and firm: No way.
“We have already given all our time and energy for just one child. We have none left for a second,” said Wang, 31, a human resources administrator with an 8-month-old son.
More than 30 years after China’s one-child policy was introduced, creating two generations of notoriously chubby, spoiled only children affectionately nicknamed “little emperors,” a population crisis is looming in the country.
The average birthrate has plummeted to 1.8 children per couple as compared with six when the policy went into effect, according to the U.N. Population Division, while the number of residents 60 and older is predicted to explode from 16.7 percent of the population in 2020 to 31.1 percent by 2050. That is far above the global average of about 20 percent.
And not only that, there is the imbalance between men and women. Chinese culture, as in the case of a lot of non-western culture, highly values male children – and, so, as one-child became the rule, more and more couples would abort female babies in favor of male children. The Culture of Death is just like that – everything about it is wrong, and all of its effects are bad.
It is high time that we stopped thinking that we can get justice out of injustice – that right will emerge from wrong. Doing the right thing almost invariably seems to be more difficult, but as facts come in, it is always revealed that it was the best thing to do. Life is a wonderful thing – even at its worst, it is still sublime. We’re always doing the wrong thing, these days. Faced with teen pregnancy, we teach them how to have sex. Faced with a growing underclass, we subsidize it. Faced with historic injustice, we apply further injustice. Perhaps we should just try to do the right thing, from now on?
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
11 Responses to “China’s Demographic Time Bomb”
Caucus of Corruption
Interesting
Folks ridiculed people for suggesting that the entire world population could fit in Texas, but at the density level the Sierra Club was advocating, all 6 billion people in the world today would be able to fit in an area just 2 percent as large as Texas. The state could hold upwards of 300 billion people at that level of density.
Responding to criticism, the Sierra Club quickly took the page down and retooled it, defining efficient urban density as only 100 households per acre.
But that’s still a population density of 153,600 people per square mile, or a density high enough to put every single man, woman and child in Texas almost 7 times. Forget Texas, the entire world population could fit in Virginia!
Hmmmmm
and the leftTARDS run around with their hair on fire.
> The world has a surface area of 510.072 million sq km. Well clearly we can
> not live any where on the surface of the world as the majority of it is
> water 361.132 million sq km. The remainer is the land mass 148.94 million sq
> km. So what is the population of the human race? Estimate is currently at
> 6,525,170,264 (July 2006 est.).
> Now let us do some translations. For every 148 sq km you get 37,000 acres of
> land.
> 37,000 acre = 148 sq Km meaning that the world has about 3.68*10 to the 10th
> Acres of land. I will be using 37,000,000,000 acres for the math below. Now
> if you were to split that land up between all the people of the earth and
> gave each one a share each would get 5.67 acres of land.
> 37,000,000,000/ 6,525,170,286 = 5.67 acres per person
> That does not sound like a lot does it? Some may say “Much of the land is
> unliveable” and they are right so let look at a area where we could make it
> nearly totally liveable. The Great State of Texas. Texas has a surface area
> of 261,797 square miles.
> 1 square mile = 3,097,600 square yards = 640 acres
> 640 * 261,797 = 167,550,080 acres in Texas
> Now lets say we move all the people of the world to the state of Texas. They
> would each get only .02568 acres of land.
> 167,550,080 / 6,525,170,286 = .02568 acres per person
> That does not sound like alot. But wait how much is .02568 acres?
> 1 acre = 4,840 square yards
> 4,840 * .02568 = 124.29 square yards
> 1 square foot = 1/9 square yard
> 124.29 * 9 = 1,118.61 square feet
> Thusly if we moved every living human to Texas and the split the land amoung
> them they would each get 1,118.61 square feet. Now you may say that still
> does not sound like alot. But consider the average square footage of a
> house.
> http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf
> http://www.pcdf.org/Meadows/squarefootage.htm
> “The average American house in the 1940s had an area of 1200 square feet”.
> Well that means individually each person could have almost a house worth of
> space to live in. But there is more as we know most people don’t live alone.
rest
……………………………….
The average population of a household in the USA is 2.5. Ok then combined
> the average household in this World Population Texas would have a living
> space of about 2,796.5 square feet. Easily a nice sized living space. But
> the “Over populated world crowd” may say “You need roads, schools and other
> things then just living space”, and they would be right. Let us consider New
> York City.
> http://www.citypopulation.de/USA-NewYork.html
> http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/landusefacts/landusefactshome.shtml
> 8,143,197 People live in the area of New York City. New York City’s land
> area covers 321 square miles (almost 206,000 acres or nine billion square
> feet). So how much land are does the average New York Citizen use?
> 206,000 Acres / 8,143,197 People = .02529 acres
> .02529 acres per person in a working, functional, and “Safe” city. How much
> land would the people get in our Total World Population in Texas? .02568
> acres per person. Wow nearly exactly the same amount, and in fact it would
> be a little more spaceous then New York City is.
> CONCLUSION: The total world population could move to Texas and make Texas in
> to a functional MEGA city that acre by acre would look much like New York
> City does today. Leaving the Rest of the world with out a single person on
> it. Image Russia and China devoid of people. The only humans you could find
> would live in Texas. And that city would be as safe as New York City is
> today, Skyscrapers and parks included.
> Summery: The world ISN’T over populated and has a long way to go before
> getting any where near it. The truth is that man kind is spread around and
> yet even with the spread we seem to perfer to live in cities. So we group up
> and naturalist get upset at seeing these groups and think that is a sign of
> over population. It is all a game on their part and don’t buy in to it.
> * * *
> Another article at -
> IS THE WORLD OVER-POPULATED?
> http://www.despatch.cth.com.au/Books_D/ENVIRON2.HTM#population
> It is certain that the world is NOT over-populated. Are you shocked by that
> statement? (as we all were when we realized that the “hole in the ozone
> layer” and the “green-house effect” were scams). The over-population scam
> follows the same sad, but horribly successful formula that these globalists
> always use to get what they want: conflict – resolution – change OR create a
> problem – advertise the problem – solve the problem. All with the cheers and
> blessing, of course, of those who so easily trust in sinful, power-hungry
> men, but cannot bring themselves to trust in God.
I think if we let all the polar bears and other large animals die, that might ease the overpopulation constraints on us humans.
So get out there, drive those SUV’s, and emit those carbons. Breathe twice as fast so’s more carbon can get into the air, and get those oceans rising, melting that polar ice, and killing off those pesky polar bears. If nothing else, you’ll piss off Sigourney Weaver…
Or, keef, we could kill off all the pit bulls that we see. There was an elderly man here just recently, 70 years old who was attacked by 4 or 5 pit bulls, and he passed away early in the morning from the attacks.
That’s why it pays to carry a pistol everywhere ya go.
I hate those dogs.
As for those Chinese, we could put them all on Overstock.com. Lol.
Nah, just kidding, I know this is a serious matter.
markographic:
their procreation problem should be your dream come true?
eventually won’t they self destruct and cease to exist?
a population implosion
no nukes necessary
markp.s.
not to say the alienistas don’t share your quest for virtue…..
bagni,
Had the Chinese government not been a horrific, anti-human conspiracy against all things decent, none of this would have ever come up. Once again, the problem is when we try to get something good out of doing something bad…its like trying to become virtuous by working at a whore house.
markhook:
building on your thoughts
too bad the chinese whorehouse govt owns the u.s…..
Social engineering experiments always seem to create far more problems than the ones they were created to solve.
There goes the proletariat. I’m with Bagni; this will almost certainly lead to the downfall of Chinese socialism, just as similar demographic pressure is currently leading to the fall of the theocracy in Iran.