?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Spot the flaw? What elephant is thriving on two blades of grass, here?

« previous entry | next entry »
May. 14th, 2014 | 08:40 pm

What elephant is thriving on two blades of grass, here? What well-known factor is ignored here? And in every big establishment source I've seen talk about this.

China’s demography is a disaster. About 2015, the seemingly boundless labor pool will begin to shrink. One reason is rapid aging, which presages that China will become old before it becomes rich. By 2050, China will have lost one-third of its working-age population. Meanwhile, the U.S. will bestride the earth as the youngest industrialized nation after India.

Also in this decade, the number of China’s dependents will start to soar. The U.S. curve will rise only slowly, due to high fertility and immigration, two classic sources of rejuvenation. By midcentury, one Chinese worker will have to support two dependents, a ratio worse than anywhere in the West. If ample labor is the food of growth, China is looking at starvation.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-05-12/u-s-is-no-1-china-is-so-yesterday

Sigh. Two dependents won't need two workers producing X amount of goods each; you only need one worker producing 2X amount.

China's One-Child policy has saved a lot of resources to invest in new tech, which the world is happily buying.

Hint: "Whoever makes two ears of corn, or two blades of grass to grow where only one grew before, deserves better of mankind, and does more essential service to his country than the whole race of politicians put together…" -- attributed to Jonathan Swift

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {5}

harvey_rrit

(no subject)

from: harvey_rrit
date: May. 15th, 2014 06:30 am (UTC)
Link

“Whoever makes two ears of corn, or two blades of grass to grow where only one grew before, deserves better of mankind, and does more essential service to his country than the whole race of politicians put together” was the comment of the King of Brobdingrag to Lemuel Gulliver after hearing an explanation of Parliament.

Reply | Thread

bemused_leftist

(no subject)

from: bemused_leftist
date: May. 15th, 2014 07:10 am (UTC)
Link

Thanks. I assume that king was a good guy?

Reply | Parent | Thread

harvey_rrit

(no subject)

from: harvey_rrit
date: May. 15th, 2014 07:41 am (UTC)
Link

I... would be assuming too. Too long ago, and fog without warning at the best of times.

But I think so. There are authors who have characters say things that put a reader instantly on the character's side, only to reveal later that the character was a villain; but while Swift could be an asshole, he wasn't a dishonest asshole.

Reply | Parent | Thread

bemused_leftist

(no subject)

from: bemused_leftist
date: May. 15th, 2014 05:22 pm (UTC)
Link

It can work the other way around. If throughout the story so far, the King and his rule had been shown bad and foolish, then this statement would be a worse insult. Like, even the worst people can see that Parliament is a bad thing, Parliament is too bad for even him to stomach.

Reply | Parent | Thread

harvey_rrit

(no subject)

from: harvey_rrit
date: May. 15th, 2014 05:57 pm (UTC)
Link

I think a writer who would have a character explain human doublethink to members of a hippocracy* would be too heavyhanded to bother.





(*The Houyhnhnms. I am unable to discover whether anyone else has ever recognized this wonderfully ghastly pun.)

Reply | Parent | Thread