西西河

主题:【原创】人口论,计划生育和老龄化 -- 孟词宗

共:💬292 🌺1335 🌵10
全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖
家园 有兴趣可以看看人口学上这篇

[URL=https://read.dukeupress.edu/demography/article/55/2/743/167782/If-Science-Had-Come-First-A-Billion-Person-Fable

]If Science Had Come First: A Billion Person Fable for the Ages (A Reply to Comments)[/URL]

Here are three lessons that we could have helped them to understand. First, the government’s grand demographic plan to bring about an extraordinary reduction of China’s population, for better or worse, had already been accomplished. In the absence of birth planning, by 2060, there might be “two China’s” instead of one. Second, China’s policy-averted population was growing far faster than its actual population, a finding that would draw attention away from the original concern over the latter. Third, and most policy-relevant of all, the reverse momentum built up by the hundreds of millions of births already averted would carry forward to avert their descendants even if the government lifted the program immediately. And if the government did so, without having to spend a single additional yuan on the birth planning program, it could still claim an averted population by 2060 far in excess of the 400 million that they had asserted. In fact, paradoxically, although any fertility uptick following a policy repeal would have reduced estimates of births averted directly resulting from policy, that reduction would have been largely offset by increased estimates of the averted descendants who would have been born under higher assumed fertility.

持续走低是正常的(这是常识)。

I attribute the astonishing population averted to China’s birth planning program, which was at some times physically coercive (e.g., the widespread sterilization campaigns of the early 1980s and occasional forced abortions), at all times punitive (with massive penalty increases for noncompliance after the 1991 central decree), and at all times determined to bring preferences into line with official quotas.

这等于是在说90前后的激进政策才是问题根本。

这篇是对一篇文章及其个批评的回应。有兴趣可以全看一遍。这篇的中文缩略版

其实计生的问题非常简单,就是过去的经验是无法有效应对长期预测的。因为系统不存在稳定运行的可能(总是会有新的变量出现,或者说突变),何况只是简单的模型。比如著名的《增长的极限》就认为“人越多越穷,越穷人越多”。

就像马克思批判马尔萨斯的:“用永恒的自然规律去解释人口过剩,当然比用资本主义生产的纯粹历史的规律去解释更加便利,更加符合……统治阶级的利益。”

其他类似的,比如《人口爆炸》《世界的未来》都是这种思维的产物。

全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河