Large data analysis of five rumors about China's population

Since March 1, more provinces have begun to implement the dual-only child policy, and China's population policy has finally been adjusted after more than 10 years of appeals, although this adjustment is not enough.

China's population is more realistic, but the population can be both consumption and production, people consume a lot, but people are more productive. National and national competition in the end is the population competition, thousands of years, the continuous Chinese civilization is dependent on the world's one-fourth of the population. Population is the ultimate goal of international competition, it is not difficult to explain why Western governments have praised and supported China's massive population control. China's demographic trend has been formed, and is accelerated, we need to rectify the situation as soon as possible in order to prevent the Chinese people in our generation fall.

As for the population problem, because many years of targeted publicity, ordinary people have many misunderstandings, some unscientific cognition is very popular. Today we have a few popular statements for everyone from the other side of the data analysis:

First: Low fertility level equals high population quality, high population quality equals national prosperity?

On the face of it, the truth seems to be no more obvious. However, if a family has fewer children, the pressure to raise and educate their children is small, and the family's investment in their children can be concentrated so that their children receive better educational resources and opportunities. In what we usually call "high quality" families, because of their good family conditions, relative to provide better education for their children, the children born in the city than the rural has a better basis for education.

But is it true? There are reports that the relatively superior family conditions of the only child, was excluded by employing units, obviously can not be regarded as "origin" on the quality and "employment discrimination", the recruitment unit to make this choice, should be considered a rational behavior, is based on the previous recruitment of the object of empirical observation research. As one recruiter said: "This is a condition that we have accumulated over the years." "In the eyes of the employing unit, urban children and only one child, at least have the following shortcomings: Hard to eat, not dedicated, work picky, poor adaptability to the environment, self-centered, cooperative spirit is not strong, and those born in rural areas, or many children from family backgrounds, most of them do not have these" problems. "

All kinds of actual performance and empirical research show that the low fertility level is directly equated with the high population quality, and there is no sufficient scientific basis. On the contrary, the only child has created a huge social problem, even the Chinese thousands of years of the formation of traditional moral concepts to the impact, not only did not improve the national quality, on the contrary there are many aspects of the decline.

Look again, even if the national quality is high, the country can be rich and powerful? Can read history, Spartan history. A little closer, you can study the history of France.

Second: is the low fertility level conducive to social and economic development?

Since the beginning of the early 90, China's total fertility rate has fallen significantly from around 6.0 in the 70 to the replacement level (on average, two children per woman), and even some studies have shown that reaching 1.1, low fertility has had a multifaceted impact on our economic and social development.

On the positive side, because of the effective containment of population growth rate, the pressure of population and resources and environment in China has been relieved to a certain extent. The population growth rate is lower than the economic development speed, and make the quality of the population and quality of life has been greatly improved. Taking per capita income as an example, according to the World Bank's latest statistics, China's annual national income per capita has reached 1740 U.S. dollars.

But the early aging society will not only make our country's "demographic dividend" period rapidly into a "population burden" period, but also put forward a severe challenge to the current fragile social security system. According to the Ministry of Labor and Social Security estimates, the next 30 years, China's pension gap will be as high as more than 6 trillion yuan. The population burden caused by low fertility has increased, and the consciousness of saving has been strengthened, which has inhibited the normal improvement of consumption. The resulting labor shortages and a host of other problems will wipe out the previous demographic dividend.

Third: Does family planning make a great contribution to economic and social development?

Now the Family Planning Commission and the population Circle said that the birth control "made China less than 300 million people, and made great contribution to China's economic and social development", and raised the people's living standard. Is it really so? Just like children reading, portrait, every year there is progress, and then poor students six grade is certainly more than the first year of learning things, can be said to be "achieved brilliant achievements." But sideways look, it's different, the third grade is the first class, in the six grade to become the last one in the class, it can only be said that the academic performance has regressed; third grade is a medium grade, to six grade is also a medium grade, it can only be said that there is no progress and no retrogression, at least not to say is "achieved brilliant achievements."

We are accustomed to using GDP to express our achievements. Per capita gross domestic product (GDP) is an important indicator of human development, but GDP per capita does not reflect the quality of life well, due to the shortcomings of the view of GDP development, the United Nations since 1990 Nanobel Economic prize winner Amartya (Amartya Sen) "People-oriented" View, using a comprehensive indicator-the human development Index (HDI)-to reflect the quality of human life. The index consists of a composite index of three main factors that reflect the quality of human life, such as life expectancy at birth, education, and real GDP per capita, usually as a measure of the overall scale of human development. In terms of HDI index, although our national power has made great progress in the past decades, the Indian HDI without family planning has increased faster than China's family planning.

China's family planning does not contribute to the increase in HDI, because China is three times times the cost of training a labor force, waste of energy and the only one-child character defect is not to be measured by material, will be used in the energy of the children to spend in the entertainment of the social atmosphere, improve the divorce rate And the past more than 20 years have been a time of high employment pressure, reducing the time to raise a new population does not increase social wealth, but only increases employment pressure. India's young demographic structure gives India great potential, while China is already entering an aging society, with experts predicting that India will overtake China after 2025.

Four: China has too many people and too little resources?

See a country or region population is not too much, not only from the total population, but also to see population density. Xinjiang, for example, has more population than Shanghai, but because Xinjiang is much bigger than Shanghai, many people say that there are too many residents in Shanghai, and no one says there are too many people in Xinjiang. From the population density, China is 135 people/square kilometers, South Korea for 470 people/square kilometers, Japan for 335 people/square kilometers, Germany for 235 people/square kilometers, the United Kingdom for 245 people/square kilometers, visible, South Korea, Japan, Germany, Britain and other developed countries have greater population density than China. Even if the so-called "unfit for human survival" desert, mountain, China is still not the world's very high density of the "powerful" one.

China is one of the world's largest mineral resources, proven mineral reserves accounted for 12% of the world, only to the United States and Russia, the world's 40 major minerals, 13 three-fourths concentrated in three countries, 23 three-fourths are concentrated in 5 countries. China's iron ore reserves accounted for 12.5% of the world, per capita only 64% of the global average, but if the global population is divided into three groups, 420 million of the five-rich countries have global 63.4%, per capita 276 tons, the remaining 5.08 billion people have only 24% reserves. China's per capita iron ore reserves are less than the world's 6.2%, but more than 74.3% people.

The less the population, the better the economic development?

Africa is the world's most economically backward region, with an area of 30.2 million square kilometres, three times times the size of China, a population of just 750 million, and Africa's population density far below the Dragons of Japan and Asia, and rich in natural resources. In fact, whether a country is rich or not is not necessarily linked to the size or population of the country. Per capita GDP rankings can be seen: in front of both populated countries, but also a narrow country.

Whether or not the population is good or bad depends largely on the level of economic development. It is precisely those countries that are slow in their economic growth and unable to provide full employment to find the population under pressure. And those countries and regions with rapid economic development, which can provide full employment opportunities and successfully achieve urbanization of population, even if the initial population density is very high, the per capita resources have very few, instead, when the economy develops to a certain extent, it feels the labor shortage.

We have come to the time to thoroughly rethink our population policy! A nation that knows how to achieve a richer life by controlling the number of people to reduce the denominator of distributive wealth will not revive.

Humans are also part of the natural ecological environment on Earth when we face global warming, animal extinction ... Wait, when we pay more attention to environmental protection, should we also pay attention to the human ecosystem?

When we do not have a clear and complete grasp of the laws of nature, often because of their own environmental damage suffered natural punishment and annoyed, we should also consider the adoption of coercive administrative means to change the structure of a human population and changes in the law may bring the "natural punishment"?

You know, our current family planning policy is actually 30 years after the so-called computer models to simulate the evolution of the development process, the results of the practice is so reliable? Now that we have the big data, should we recalculate it?