Don’t be surprised by China’s collapse

[GreatHanWarrior]

hungry

There is no hunger problem in China. Thank you. Don't always believe that China and your country face the same problems.

 

[A Voice of Reason]

Absolutely the last thing China has to worry about is running out of people. It will be centuries before China reaches a pleasant population of, say, 300 million, where people can stretch their hands without bumping into another's nose.

China will absolutely run out of people or at least productive people. Just for instance who will look after the many hundreds of millions of elderly?

Because people are living longer but not having children, the demographic transition means that there is a huge bulge in the population pyramid that is working its way up to retirement. In some countries this retirement phase is already well underway. The aged-dependency crisis stares many countries in the face but especially in S.E. Asian countries where the retirement plan traditionally IS ones children. It is one's filial duty to look after ones parents and parents parents. With only one kid per couple and longer lifespans, each child in China will be culturally expected to look after 2 aged parents and 4 grandparents. Each couple to look after 4 aged parents and maybe 8 grandparents. PLUS to have have their own career and family. (PLUS to somehow have lots of kids to reverse the national demographic suicide plunge ). Trust me, it's a coming crisis. It's not merely absolute numbers but relative population distributions.

Even with the aged care outsourced to the government, it's a case of just so many taxpayers per pensioner. In fact, it's reaching the unsustainable stage of so many pensioners per tax payer. With fewer and fewer taxpayers, and more and more pensioners, the government has to devote more and more of its resources for aged care. If the demographic decline is steep, as it is in China, there will be a breaking point.

The aged-dependency ratio is also only one of the numerous issues that the world is starting to grapple with concerning demographic decline. For the last 500 years since the start of European deep water navigation, the world has gotten used to a world of "More". We do not have the model or tools to deal with a world of "Less." In China, for instance, most people have their life's savings in property. It's been a great investment, a sure thing since the 1990s. HOWEVER no matter how the property market is manipulated in the end, when you come down to it, fewer people mean less homes are needed. Less of just about everything is needed. Leaving out location and other factors, your house will be worth less every year, not more. Our society around the world is not built on a future with "less".

 

[SaadH]

This is not about Europe.

Animated Chart: China’s Aging Population (1950-2100)

See why China is facing a demographic crisis in this animated chart.

www.visualcapitalist.com

You can force people to abort but you cannot force them to have sex. You better move to China quick.

Really? that's rather willful ignorance of one's own history...

You lot forcefully bred people like animals at an industrial scale not too long ago...

 

[epebble]

China will absolutely run out of people or at least productive people. Just for instance who will look after the many hundreds of millions of elderly?

Because people are living longer but not having children, the demographic transition means that there is a huge bulge in the population pyramid that is working its way up to retirement. In some countries this retirement phase is already well underway. The aged-dependency crisis stares many countries in the face but especially in S.E. Asian countries where the retirement plan traditionally IS ones children. It is one's filial duty to look after ones parents and parents parents. With only one kid per couple and longer lifespans, each child in China will be culturally expected to look after 2 aged parents and 4 grandparents. Each couple to look after 4 aged parents and maybe 8 grandparents. PLUS to have have their own career and family. (PLUS to somehow have lots of kids to reverse the national demographic suicide plunge ). Trust me, it's a coming crisis. It's not just absolute number but relative population distributions.

Even with the aged care outsourced to the government, it's a case of so many taxpayers per pensioner. With fewer and fewer taxpayers, ans more and more pensioners, the government has to devote more and more of its resources for aged care. If the demographic decline is steep, as it is in China, there will be a breaking point.


View attachment 957638

The aged-dependency ratio is also only one of the numerous issues that the world is starting to grapple with concerning demographic decline. For the last 500 years since the start of European deep water navigation, the world has gotten used to a world of "More". We do not have the model or tools to deal with a world of "Less." In China, for instance, most people have their life's savings in property. It's been a great investment, a sure thing since the 1990s. No matter how the property market is manipulated in the end, when you come down to it, fewer people mean less homes are needed. Less of just about everything is needed. Leaving out location and other factors, your house will be worth less every year, not more. Our society around the world is not built on a future with "less".

China has solved far more difficult problems in its history than taking care of old people. It is a collectivist culture and nation. How hard it is for China to build industrial size old age homes and have a cadre of elder care workers take care of the aged, just like a giant iPhone assembly factory. In a pinch, its 2 million active-duty PLA army or half million reserve can be deputized to serve the aged. If all else fails, they can invite guest workers from adjacent countries like Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia. Japan is doing that now. We have been doing that for childcare with Mexicans for generations now for middle class families and from Europe (Au Pair) for the elites.

 

[A Voice of Reason]

China has solved far more difficult problems in its history than taking care of old people. It is a collectivist culture and nation. How hard it is for China to build industrial size old age homes and have a cadre of elder care workers take care of the aged, just like a giant iPhone assembly factory. In a pinch, its 2 million active-duty PLA army or half million reserve can be deputized to serve the aged. If all else fails, they can invite guest workers from adjacent countries like Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia. Japan is doing that now. We have been doing that for childcare with Mexicans for generations now for middle class families and from Europe (Au Pair) for the elites.

Because the scale of the problem and the speed that it is happening is simply that huge.

In the USA with a much better demography than China plus immigrants, so the demographic transition is happening a lot slower, some $1.2 trillion or ~20% of the budget is spent on welfare programs as of 2023 of which aged care is a huge percentage.

Plus the aged care ratio is only one of the many issues the demographic decline is hitting China with.

There has never been a demographic storm the scale and speed that China is staring at. I am however hoping that they will succeed in solving it all. The world will not like what happens if they don't

 

[epebble]

The world will not like what happens if they don't

The world will care the least if old people in China are not well taken care of. How much did the world care when not old people were not well taken of?

 

[A Voice of Reason]

The world will care the least if old people in China are not well taken care of. How much did the world care when not old people were not well taken of?

It's not so much Chinese elderly (like what's a mere half a billion people here and there) but rather China. It is a huge part of the current world order. If it falls apart, as some have predicted, the world is in for a world of hurt.

 

[epebble]

If it falls apart, as some have predicted, the world is in for a world of hurt.

Have faith in resiliency of an ancient nation. It is not going to fall apart. A brief snippet of events that did not cause falling apart:

War	Death range	Date	Combatants	Location	Notes
Chinese Warring States	1,500,000+	c. 475 BC - 221 BC	Seven great powers of China	China	Estimated at 1,500,000 before Qin's wars of unification
Qin's Wars of Unification	700,000+	230 BC–221 BC	Qin state vs. Han, Zhao, Yan, Wei, Chu, Qi States	China	– Part of Warring States period
Three Kingdoms War	36,000,000–40,000,000	184–280	Wei vs. Shu vs. Wu	China	Academically, the period of the Three Kingdoms refers to the period between the foundation of the state of Wei in 220 and the conquest of the state of Wu by the Jin dynasty in 280. The earlier, "unofficial" part of the period, from 184 to 220, was marked by chaotic infighting between warlords in various parts of China. See: End of the Han dynasty - Also, note that the death range provided is actually the amount the population declined according to the census data and is likely an overestimation of actual combat fatalities.
Yellow Turban Rebellion	3,000,000–7,000,000	184–205	Peasants vs. Eastern Han China	China	– Part of Three Kingdoms War

An Lushan Rebellion

13,000,000–36,000,000

755–763

Tang dynasty China and Islamic Empire vs. Yan state

China

Also known as the An–Shi Rebellio

Transition from Ming to Qing	25,000,000+	1616–1683	Qing China vs. Ming China vs. peasant rebels like the Shun dynasty (led by Li Zicheng) and Xi dynasty (led by Zhang Xianzhong) vs. Kingdom of Shu (She-An Rebellion) vs. Evenk-Daur federation (Bombogor)	China	Also known as the Ming–Qing transition
White Lotus Rebellion	100,000+	1794–1804	Qing China vs. White Lotus rebels	China
Taiping Rebellion	20,000,000–70,000,000	1850–1864	Qing China vs. Taiping Heavenly Kingdom	China	Also known as the Taiping Civil War
Red Turban Rebellion (1854–1856)	1,000,000+	1854–1856	Qing China vs. Red Turban rebels	China
Miao Rebellion	4,900,000	1854–1873	Qing China vs. Miao	China	Also known as the Qian rebellion
Punti–Hakka Clan Wars	500,000–1,000,000+	1855-1868	Hakka vs. Punti	China
Panthay Rebellion	890,000–1,000,000	1856–1873	Qing China vs. Hui	China	– Also known as the Du Wenxiu Rebellion
Dungan Revolt	8,000,000–20,000,000	1862–1877	Qing China vs. Hui vs. Kashgaria	China	– Also known as the Tongzhi Hui Revolt
Boxer Rebellion	100,000	1899–1901	Boxers vs. Foreign powers	China
1911 Revolution	220,000	1911	Qing China vs. Revolutionaries	China
Chinese Civil War	8,000,000–11,692,000	1927–1949	ROC vs. PRC	China
Second Sino-Japanese War	20,000,000–25,000,000	1937–1945	Republic of China and allies vs. Japan	China	Part of World War II

 

[Zsari]

Japan managed to get rich before it got old. It also has had 40 years to try different strategies. It is still in big trouble. You can, by the way, buy rural houses in Japan for free. It has worked itself, literally, into this demographic disaster. But by amassing per capita wealth before it got old it is doing better than China will likely achieve. The aged-dependency ratio, just for instance, is being hard felt in Japan, it will likely be crippling in China.

Korea, demographically speaking, is a dead man walking. China currently has a (horrific) TFR of 1.08. To sustain a population you need a TFR of 2.1 (not 2.0). Korea has a mind blowing TFR of 0.7. All it means is that Korea is plunging off the demographic cliff into disaster at an even steeper plunge. Just because there is an example of an even worse demographic collapse in progress should provide no comfort whatsoever.

Europe or at least Western Europe is also not looking good but once again it got rich before it got old. In addition it has been able to kick the can down the road by being a migrant destination, something that Chinese (and Japanese and Korean thus far) social norms cannot emulate.

The thing about demographics is that trends are pretty much baked in for at least a generation or so. We have a pretty good idea of how many children will be born in 20 years time because we know how many 0-30 year old there are today. There is no country on Earth that, upon dipping below the sustainable level of 2.1, has managed to up its TFR back above it. At most, some Northern European countries have managed to temporarily up their TFR from, say, the likes of 1.4 to 1.5 by spending a lot of money on pro natalist policies and programs.

China turned a fertily decline that would have happened anyway due to urbanization and industrialization into a fertility collapse with its one child policy.
It belatedly started accepting the reality of the forthcoming disaster when it raised its child limit policy from 1 to 2 and then to 3 and just this year seems to have, belatedly, fully come to its senses and removed all restrictions. Some would say it is too little, too late.

China has, demographically/statistically speaking (not literally), not only run out of children but has also run out of young adults to have those children. It boggles the mind to consider any way that China could reverse it even if it would somehow institute a Hand-Maiden level of fertility programs. However I do look forward to how China tries. Perhaps they will indeed surprise us all with an absolute miracle. A declining China will be felt hard by the entire world.


PS. For those that just don't get the problem of declining/collapsing total fertility rates, consider this:

China's fertility rate drops to record low 1.09 in 2022- state media

China's fertility rate is estimated to have dropped to a record low of 1.09 in 2022, the National Business Daily said on Tuesday, a figure likely to rattle authorities as they try to boost the country's declining number of new births.

www.reuters.com

Demographics of China - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Getting rich and getting older are not mutually exclusive.

 

[A Voice of Reason]

Getting rich and getting older are not mutually exclusive.

Of course not. But only a few like Japan and select Western countries have achieved both thus far.

 

[Elijah Manson]

China will absolutely run out of people or at least productive people. Just for instance who will look after the many hundreds of millions of elderly?

Because people are living longer but not having children, the demographic transition means that there is a huge bulge in the population pyramid that is working its way up to retirement. In some countries this retirement phase is already well underway. The aged-dependency crisis stares many countries in the face but especially in S.E. Asian countries where the retirement plan traditionally IS ones children. It is one's filial duty to look after ones parents and parents parents. With only one kid per couple and longer lifespans, each child in China will be culturally expected to look after 2 aged parents and 4 grandparents. Each couple to look after 4 aged parents and maybe 8 grandparents. PLUS to have have their own career and family. (PLUS to somehow have lots of kids to reverse the national demographic suicide plunge ). Trust me, it's a coming crisis. It's not merely absolute numbers but relative population distributions.

Even with the aged care outsourced to the government, it's a case of just so many taxpayers per pensioner. In fact, it's reaching the unsustainable stage of so many pensioners per tax payer. With fewer and fewer taxpayers, and more and more pensioners, the government has to devote more and more of its resources for aged care. If the demographic decline is steep, as it is in China, there will be a breaking point.


View attachment 957638

The aged-dependency ratio is also only one of the numerous issues that the world is starting to grapple with concerning demographic decline. For the last 500 years since the start of European deep water navigation, the world has gotten used to a world of "More". We do not have the model or tools to deal with a world of "Less." In China, for instance, most people have their life's savings in property. It's been a great investment, a sure thing since the 1990s. HOWEVER no matter how the property market is manipulated in the end, when you come down to it, fewer people mean less homes are needed. Less of just about everything is needed. Leaving out location and other factors, your house will be worth less every year, not more. Our society around the world is not built on a future with "less".

I know people who live in China who say that the government will extend the retirement age in the future, thus increasing a relatively large group of elderly people who will still be in the job market.

Still on this topic, the government seems to be encouraging specialization in areas for the elderly by creating provincial or national programs to teach elderly people a specialization in the desired area, again, this contributes to a range of elderly people still working in the job market.

Finally, the same people I know who live in China claim that the Chinese government is already considering changing the retirement system to a funding system, as is the Hong Kong system, with the retiree withdrawing in a single installment, the value he contributed to the system, considering interest over the accumulated years and monetary correction.

I don't know if all of this is true, but if it is true, all of this would help address part of China's aging problem.

 

[Zsari]

Of course not. But only a few like Japan and select Western countries have achieved both thus far.

The way China progresses in productivity and technology, it’s just a matter of time.

 

[gambit]

China has solved far more difficult problems in its history than taking care of old people. It is a collectivist culture and nation. How hard it is for China to build industrial size old age homes and have a cadre of elder care workers take care of the aged, just like a giant iPhone assembly factory. In a pinch, its 2 million active-duty PLA army or half million reserve can be deputized to serve the aged. If all else fails, they can invite guest workers from adjacent countries like Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia. Japan is doing that now. We have been doing that for childcare with Mexicans for generations now for middle class families and from Europe (Au Pair) for the elites.

Taking care of the elders is not the problem. The consumption economy is.

When you are late teens, you are not really consuming much. You are just starting out in life, either by working at a minor job or going to college. Your contribution to the economy is miniscule.

When you are in your 20s, you would be the first level of consumer. You must buy in order to get your life going stronger. If you marry in this age group, both of you would still be in the same boat. You have yet to start a family.

When you are in your 30s, now you, and maybe your spouse, would be near peak consumer level. You would be established at your job, maximizing your performance. You should be at your healthiest giving you stamina to live your life to the fullest.

When you are in your 40s, now you are either peak or beginning of decline in consumption level. You would have been promoted with higher pay and you need to buy to support a growing family.

When you are in your 50s, you would be in a declining spending stage. Your children would be either gone or getting close to leaving the home. Your spending is now mostly in maintenance of life stage.

When you are in your 60s, you would be spending less in order to prepare for retirement. Your children is out of the house. You are probably at your peak at work.

When you are in your 70s, now you are or should be in full retirement. Your spending will be in minimum because you have no other needs outside of maintenance.

What this mean for a capitalist economy is that the 20-40 age groups are the economy growing groups. They are the ones who invent, innovate, fix, export, import, and travel. Everything to churn currency and grow capital and credit thru the economy. But they are growing smaller in China. Extending the retirement age is not the solution because the 50-70 age groups will be working just to sustain their lives. Guest workers are also not the solution because many of them will be sending their money back to their home countries. What will China do? Have an elder class with a guest workers class to take care of them along with maintaining the economy? Will guest workers join the PLA to help defend the country?

China is in SERIOUS demographics trouble.

 

[epebble]

Taking care of the elders is not the problem. The consumption economy is.

When you are late teens, you are not really consuming much. You are just starting out in life, either by working at a minor job or going to college. Your contribution to the economy is miniscule.

When you are in your 20s, you would be the first level of consumer. You must buy in order to get your life going stronger. If you marry in this age group, both of you would still be in the same boat. You have yet to start a family.

When you are in your 30s, now you, and maybe your spouse, would be near peak consumer level. You would be established at your job, maximizing your performance. You should be at your healthiest giving you stamina to live your life to the fullest.

When you are in your 40s, now you are either peak or beginning of decline in consumption level. You would have been promoted with higher pay and you need to buy to support a growing family.

When you are in your 50s, you would be in a declining spending stage. Your children would be either gone or getting close to leaving the home. Your spending is now mostly in maintenance of life stage.

When you are in your 60s, you would be spending less in order to prepare for retirement. Your children is out of the house. You are probably at your peak at work.

When you are in your 70s, now you are or should be in full retirement. Your spending will be in minimum because you have no other needs outside of maintenance.

What this mean for a capitalist economy is that the 20-40 age groups are the economy growing groups. They are the ones who invent, innovate, fix, export, import, and travel. Everything to churn currency and grow capital and credit thru the economy. But they are growing smaller in China. Extending the retirement age is not the solution because the 50-70 age groups will be working just to sustain their lives. Guest workers are also not the solution because many of them will be sending their money back to their home countries. What will China do? Have an elder class with a guest workers class to take care of them along with maintaining the economy? Will guest workers join the PLA to help defend the country?

China is in SERIOUS demographics trouble.

If China demographically scales down and becomes a U.S. sized nation with U.S. GDP what will go wrong? Capitalist economy does not mean ever increasing population till there is only standing room. It can also mean raise in productivity. Chinese can get more educated and skilled, produce more services etc., Why can't they produce their own Microsoft, Google, GE, Boeing, Apple, Intel etc., instead of making stuff sold in Walmart?

 

[gambit]

If China demographically scales down and becomes a U.S. sized nation with U.S. GDP what will go wrong? Capitalist economy does not mean ever increasing population till there is only standing room. It can also mean raise in productivity. Chinese can get more educated and skilled, produce more services etc., Why can't they produce their own Microsoft, Google, GE, Boeing, Apple, Intel etc., instead of making stuff sold in Walmart?

A capitalist economy is a CONSUMPTION economy. I do not know why that is so difficult to understand.

Who is doing the consumption? Domestic population, yes. Export, yes. China have been doing the export part for probably too long. Do you dispute the age groups I briefly outlined? As the major consumption groups decline, labor cost will go up, which will make China less attractive as manufacturing source as time go by, which mean export as a consumption source will decrease. The US is not suffering the demographics decline as China is. The US have both guest workers and immigration, and with the native population, our consumption groups will last longer and more dynamic.