[Pearls Before Swine]

I’ve been hearing about the one child policy for decades, but the Chinese population doesn’t seem to have dropped. True, its growth has been arrested, but it seems to be pretty static. That means that, despite the policy, the average birth rate must be close to or slightly above the replacement rate of 2.0 per couple. So what gives? Is it only enforced on the non-connected?

[tbw2]

It is one child in the cities, two for farmers (to also help keep them on the farms), and three for minorities. It averages out to about 1.7-1.8 kids per family. There biggest issue is the great leap forward pushed families up to 3-4 kids, their baby boom. The one child rule was so that all those large families didn’t have large families in turn.

[Dr. Sivana]

I’ve been hearing about the one child policy for decades, but the Chinese population doesn’t seem to have dropped. True, its growth has been arrested, but it seems to be pretty static. That means that, despite the policy, the average birth rate must be close to or slightly above the replacement rate of 2.0 per couple. So what gives? Is it only enforced on the non-connected?

That is a good question. The answer has to do with demographics. Before the one-child policy, there was a big spike in the population, analogous to our baby boom, but later. That generation is the one having one child per, but they themselves have not been dying off yet. Lets say you have 500 million in 1959 and 20 years later you have 900 million, a growth of 400 million. Then the one child policy is applied and pretty ruthlessly enforced, with little immigration or emigration. Nearly half of those children (the girls) born between 1979 and 1990 would have their one child by now and they are now between 23 and 49 years old. In fact, the grandchildren of the first wave would be being born.

In the meantime, you have increasing life expectancy, so only a portion of those people around in 1959 (the original 500 million) have died off. The rest, mostly 58 and under, are mostly alive. So, if I took a stab at realistic sounding numbers:

Say, 350 million of the original 500 million are still alive (70%) (Most Chinese in 1959 would have been younger than average after wars and low life expectancy of the era in the region).

Say 95% of 400 million more born between 1959 and 1979 are still alive and living in Red China. (380 million)

Say that nearly 96% of the women (45% of the Chinese population IN THAT AGE BRACKET)have had their one child. (400 million x 48% = 196 million)

Say that 90% of the women born during the early years of the one child policy (1979-1984) have also had their one child (At this point women are more like 45% of the age bracket, so guesstimate .45 * 30 million = 13.5 million

My numbers, of course, are way off compared the actual population, but it is an example of how you can have such a policy for nearly 30 years and maintain a stable population number. The problem begins when the cultural revolution babies start dying off. Their population is aging, though not nearly as fast as Japan's. In fifty years, it will show up in the numbers. It will show up in an old demographic far sooner. Imperialism is one way to stave off the consequnces of this. (Or, abandonment of the policy in the first place.)