ProWomanProLife

  • The Story
  • The Women
  • Notable Columns
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / All Posts / Even China doesn’t want the one child policy anymore

Even China doesn’t want the one child policy anymore

December 15, 2009 by Andrea Mrozek 2 Comments

Beijing tries to put brakes on plummeting birth rates, reads the headline in today’s Vancouver Sun:

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 the city’s low birth rate 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 eight-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.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: China, population bomb, population control

Comments

  1. Rachel says

    December 15, 2009 at 7:55 pm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yRh5NNiFG0

    John Lennon had it right, for once…

    Reply
  2. Suricou Raven says

    December 16, 2009 at 6:22 pm

    The link doesn’t work.

    Population is problematic. For society to florish, continuous growth is needed – there must always be more people now than there were, to support the previous generation in retirement, and because only through growth can jobs be created. If an economy isn’t growing, it’s dying. At the same time though, growth simply cannot be sustained forever – basic laws of physics make this quite clear.

    So the choice is between leveling off population now, and having a demographic crisis in sixty years, or continuing to let it grow and having mass starvation in a century or two. Screwed either way.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssby feather

Notable Columns

  • A pro-woman budget wouldn't tell me how to live my life
  • Bad medicine
  • Birth control pills have side effects
  • Canada Summer Jobs debacle–Can Trudeau call abortion a right?
  • Celebrate these Jubilee jailbirds
  • China has laws against sex selection. But not Canada. Why?
  • Family love is not a contract
  • Freedom to discuss the “choice”
  • Gender quotas don't help business or women
  • Ghomeshi case a wake-up call
  • Hidden cost of choice
  • Life at the heart of the matter
  • Life issues and the media
  • Need for rational abortion debate
  • New face of the abortion debate
  • People vs. kidneys
  • PET-P press release
  • Pro-life work is making me sick
  • Prolife doesn't mean anti-woman
  • Settle down or "lean in"
  • Sex education is all about values
  • Thank you, Camille Paglia
  • The new face of feminism
  • Today’s law worth discussing
  • When debate is shut down in Canada’s highest places
  • Whither feminism?

Categories

  • All Posts
  • Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia
  • Charitable
  • Ethics
  • Featured Media
  • Featured Posts
  • Feminism
  • Free Expression
  • International
  • Motherhood
  • Other
  • Political
  • Pregnancy Care Centres
  • Reproductive Technologies

All Posts

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in