
Call for more babies as China turns to grey - tokenadult
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6841430.ece
======
sorbus
Seems fairly obvious; one child per family/couple will result in the
population decreasing over time (it's not even enough for replacement). Added
to the cited 119 to 100 ratio of male to female children, it's a pretty major
issue.

Not to say that decreasing populations are a bad thing, of course.

~~~
patio11
Decreasing populations are a bad thing if your social insurance program is a
Ponzi scheme.

Most are.

~~~
mynameishere
All are, even the traditional family is a "Ponzi Scheme" in that new investors
(babies) pass money up to old investors (the elderly). Unlike most Ponzi
schemes, however, the old investors are seeking modest gains, and for a very
limited time.

The problem is when the pyramid goes upside down (4 grandparents, 2 parents, 1
child). In that case, policy doesn't enter into the equation. You're effed no
matter what.

~~~
ojbyrne
I don't know what kind of family you live in, but in mine the flow of money
has passed in the opposite direction for generations.

~~~
mynameishere
That's mainly true because we (now-a-days) treat anyone under 24 as an
invalid, needing constant subsidization. In reality, the only people who need
welfare are: actual cripples, young children, and the elderly.

Cutting off the gravy train to young adults would have _zero_ systematic
effect.

~~~
aaronblohowiak
I think you may have misinterpreted the point the parent was making -- some of
us have families where the elderly leave wealth to the next generation when
they pass on.

------
jackmoore
Why don't we just give them some of ours.

