Eh, according to CNA, the birth rate has reached worrisome proportions:
More at: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2008/02/28/2003403167
I still think we furriners can really contribute to society in this regard. Any ideas? 
They should increase it to 2 babies per woman. Itâs really hard to have 1.6 babies. Thereâs your problem right there.
They should increase it to 2 babies per woman. Itâs really hard to have 1.6 babies. Thereâs your problem right there.[/quote]
Thank God we have irishstu on hand to solve all of the worlds problems!
Why increase the population growth rate? Taiwanâs not a big place, after allâŚ
Taiwanâs 1.1 isnât the lowest birth rate in the world. From my understanding, Spainâs is 1.1 as well. Basically that means that 2 people are having only one child. In 40 years or so, that means a population shrinkage of almost 50 percent.
An interesting read on demographics can be read in Mark Steynâs book, America Alone. With European birth rates usually varying from 1.1 to 1.6, the populations will shrink dramatically in the coming years. How will these countryâs pay for their generous social safety nets with their tax base dying? Immigration 
Of course, in Asia, there is no real history of massive immigration. So countries such as Japan, Taiwan etc. will really have to come up with some innovative strategies to keep their populations at current levels. The only country that has made a significant effort so far is Singapore, almost to the point of eugenics (clubs for smart people to meet each other etc). As much as I despise the Lee Kuan Yew regime, that country has made serious efforts to offset their impending demographic crisis. Citizens are awarded huge tax breaks and baby bonuses for each kid they have. Despite the non-fecundity of the local Chinese population there, the country also makes it so easy for foreigners to get PR. Aggressively recruiting foreigners to live there will ensure Singaporeâs population remains pretty constant in the short-term future. The goverment in Singapore even hires foreigners for senior civil service positions. Can you imagine that happening in Taiwan? Hopefully, Ma will realize the seriousness of this problem and come up with some Singapore-like policies at least with regards to foreigners and birth rates.
I think Taiwan is behind the ball in this matter. Japan is really behind the ball (due to its xenophobia of gaijin).
A shrinking population results in economic decline, falling property prices, labor shortages, shortages of military conscripts, and difficulty funding pensions and welfare for the elderly, I think.
And too much population leads to an overloaded infrastructure, lack of personal space, environmental problems, social problems of its own. Why not try letting the population shrink to a more reasonable level (like, someone less than the second most densely populated nation on the planet, an island that has to import most of its resources) and work on improving the social infrastructure to deal with the problems instead of just urging women to have more babies? It seems a stop-gap, short-sighted measure at best.
but DB, a growing population means less and less space, living and arable and wilderness, less resource, less âheadroomâ for every person. sometimes itâs good for populations to shrink, especially when theyâre polluting their own nest. you canât put more than a handful of fish in an aquarium or it breaks down and they all die in their own waste.
why increase the population of the world anyway? a growing population cannot be sustained indefintely, and we are already well past the point that the earth can sustain. many argue that that point is about 3 billion (as an upper limit), so that now weâre at about twice that level. no wonder the worldâs screwed, and the claims of people whio say that the economy won;t handle it are specious.
itâs not the worldâs population growth or lack of it thatâs the problem, itâs the economy. fix the stupid idea that pervades just about every modern and semi-modern school of economic thought, that all economic growth is necessary. itâs a broken system: great for those times when thereâs spare space, but totally inappropriate now. now we need a stable and mature system, not a system that rewards ever greater environmental plunder. myopes.
I agree with your points to a degree. A small population decrease could make things a little more manageable. However, with a 1.1 birth rate, we are talking about a 50 percent decrease. That leads to a significant decline both economically and socially. How does a government take care of its aging population when there just isnât enough money going into the state coffers to pay for socialized medicine, education spending, infrastructure improvements etc. Going from 25 million to 18-20 million might be an improvement but to 12.5 million?
but with half the population, there is half the requirement for hospitals, not more. with half the population, there is less than half the imported food requirement, or far less.
with half the population, its realy easy to meet Kyoto air pollution targets. and with robotics going the way it is now,m the same half the population can make twice the material their ancesto0rs did (thoughwhy bpother: therâd be half the demandif other copuntries also halved their population.
the real point is, people are saying: Look: Chinaâs really big and weâll NEVER catch up unless all you breeders go out there and make like little wabbits and have a complete football team.
whatever. having kids is selfish in todayâs world, i think: give me that resource, me me me.
but with half the population, there is half the requirement for hospitals, not more. with half the population, there is less than half the imported food requirement, or far less.
with half the population, its realy easy to meet Kyoto air pollution targets. and with robotics going the way it is now,m the same half the population can make twice the material their ancesto0rs did (though why bother: thereâd only be half the demand if other countries also halved their population. AND THATâS SCARING THE ECONOMISTS. People: donât listen to economists. Remember, theyâre the dweebs that we all used to tease when they were just known as accountants. now there are so many of them, theyâve gotten together and made themselves out to be IMPORTANT.
the real point is, people are saying: Look: Chinaâs really big and weâll NEVER catch up unless all you breeders go out there and make like little wabbits and have a complete football team.
whatever. having kids is selfish in todayâs world, i think: give me that resource, me me me.
I think that with a 1.1 birth rate, the population wouldnât go down that much because people are living so much longer.
I donât think so. Even with the medical advances being made, a 1.1 birth rate is still far below a zero growth rate. A zero growth rate is achieved when the births and deaths are equal. This would be disasterous for Taiwan. A Taiwanese government report published in 2006 predicted that, if this trend continues, it will take 3.3 working-age people to support each senior by 2026. The government believes that the low birthrate will result in a potentially dangerous population structure, in which a small number of young people will be asked to pay for the countryâs many senior citizens.
Pardon me if Iâm wrong, and I just might be, but wouldnât the Vatican have the worldâs lowest birth rate?
Just sayinâ
Ya but the VAtican doesnt allow birth control of any form. And its an artificial country. But then so is Taiwan âŚartificial country (in name anyway).
Make the retirement age 75 and promote better health and a better life for all . And lets decrease Earths population explosion and change our econ system to match the lower birth rates.
OR we have to do an import/export. Countries that have a booming birthrate like Brasil will have to have a population exchange. Give us one young Brasilian in exchange for one older TAiwanese for every extra birth for example. RADICAL RADICAL concept.
Retire at 75!!! How depressing is that???
I would imagine that if the trend continues and caretakers are direly needed in the future to take care of the elderly, they will materialize in the form of foreign workers. The demand will be met one way or another.
Back in 2003 Taiwan was already on this issue and had come up with some impressive measures!! Every family who had three children would be given a 30000 nt bonus upon the birth of the fourth!!! Now, thereâs some thinking for ya!
Edit: Forgot to say that I canât figure out what the statistcs about how many babies born to one foreign parent, or the number of marriages with foreigners have to do with the issue of population decline. I mean, with out the bignoses in question one in 9.8 babies wouldnât have been created. So whatâs the beef?
A shrinking population results in economic decline, falling property prices, labor shortages, shortages of military conscripts, and difficulty funding pensions and welfare for the elderly, I think.[/quote]
So what youâre saying is the sky is falling?
Bignose is a drop in the bucket. The foreign spouse is likely to be a mail order bride from Vietnam.
Bignose is a drop in the bucket. The foreign spouse is likely to be a mail order bride from Vietnam.[/quote]
True. So? I still donât get it. Whatâs the beef with the babes who are only half Taiwanese. Theyâre citizens, right? They might move away some day? Mightnât any other? Or is this an issue with thinning the ethnic Chinese gene pool ever so slightly? It just doesnât seem related to the topic.