Cog wrote: A permanent power down is a much harder sell since it's harder to explain the end state and why we collectively must act now.
China's population will peak in 2029 at 1.44 billion before beginning a period of "unstoppable" decline, a government report said.
The study by China Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) warned that the country must implement policies to handle a smaller workforce and an older population, the BBC reported on Sunday.
Both changes combined -- long-term population decline and a continuously ageing population -- could cause "very unfavourable social and economic consequences", the report said.
In 2015 the world's most populous country ended its one-child policy in a bid to tackle the problems.
According to latest UN estimates, China has a population of 1.41 billion.
The study, appearing in CASS's Green Book of Population and Labour, said that working population numbers were now stagnating, with a low fertility rate set to cause further issues.
By the middle of the century, China's population is expected to drop to 1.36 billion - a fall in the labour force of close to 200 million.
The study also predicted a rise in the dependency rate (increase in the proportion of non-working people like the elderly and the children).
While relaxing the one-child policy will help long-term, in the short-term it will create more dependents, according to the report.
Newfie wrote:Heingburg on degrowth
From our own front page
http://richardheinberg.com/museletter-3 ... ter-for-it
Newfie wrote:Then it will be biblical pain.
baha wrote:
While the rest of us live with the consequences. Ecosystems are dying. The food chain has holes in it. The ocean is dying. But the starving folks in Ethiopia have a good book to read. WTF?
This is why the 1% should be singled out and forced to carry their share of the load. They should also suffer some consequences.
:
baha wrote:
The only way to get their attenption is by tearing down the tower.
Ibon wrote:baha wrote:
While the rest of us live with the consequences. Ecosystems are dying. The food chain has holes in it. The ocean is dying. But the starving folks in Ethiopia have a good book to read. WTF?
This is why the 1% should be singled out and forced to carry their share of the load. They should also suffer some consequences.
:
Here is the rub. Suffering is relative to ones socio economic status. Yes of course the poor in Ethopia and around the world will suffer disproportionately in real terms. They are however much tougher in having already lived with severe constraints.
The 1%, the very wealthy, may not suffer in real terms the same dimension as the poor but the rich are so spoiled t and unfamiliar with hardship they are like the soft underbelly of a baby deer. In relative terms they will suffer immensely.
The lofty rich are way up there and have the farthest to fall. They are not honed to hardships. They are collectively spoiled wimps.
Just look at our petulant president!!!
Return to Conservation & Efficiency
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests