Technology

hideshow 30 child comments

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 16 points 2 months ago (7 children)

And wasn't China very recently concerned about their birthrate being too high? One Child Policy?

Now they're already concerned about their birth rate being too low?

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] PonyOfWar@pawb.social 47 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The one-child policy was abolished in 2015, but birth rates have continued to decline after that. They currently have one of the world's lowest fertility rates.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 4 points 2 months ago

It's crazy, like overpopulation, stress, and pollution mean people don't want kids or something.

parent

[–] YeahToast@aussie.zone 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Well yes, but also no. I think it was only really heavily policed in the 70s and early 80s then was lifted so regional and rural could have a second child (wiki says by '84 the single child policy only impacted 35% of the population). Still goes to show by forcibly dropping birthrates how much it destroys future planning

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Still goes to show by forcibly dropping birthrates how much it destroys future planning.

Looking at all the other countries, it may not have had an impact on future birthrates at all.

parent

[–] YeahToast@aussie.zone 1 point 2 months ago

Yeah true regarding birthrates.. but I think it probably catapulted median age

This website states that in 1960 median age was around 20 (comparable internationally), median age in 2025 was 42( international was 31)

parent

[–] Anivia@feddit.org 1 point 2 months ago

Looking at all the other countries, it may not have had an impact on future birthrates at all.

Yes, and if they didn't have the policy in the past, then today's birth rates would be even more devastating for the demographic

parent

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago*

They were wrong, and they know it, but also nobody's allowed to say that. Ditto for a bunch of other Mao policies.

parent

[+] DeLancre@piefed.social 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

parent

[–] Trev625@sopuli.xyz 23 points 2 months ago

It says that it was proposed... We propose a lot of bills that never pass here in the US. I'm not sure how China's laws are setup but Wikipedia doesn't say that it was ever implemented.

parent

[–] morto@piefed.social 9 points 2 months ago

6% of income? Still much cheaper than a kid!

parent

[+] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -6 points 2 months ago (18 children)

Is that your take on the matter? How is wanting yo promote real human relationships between teenagers a bad thing?

hideshow 18 child comments

parent

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 23 points 2 months ago* (13 children)

This is like trying to solve mental illness by making sickness illegal.

hideshow 13 child comments

parent

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 10 points 2 months ago

I'd say that's more like trying to solve mental illness by making it illegal to exploit and profit from it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erewhon

parent

[–] tal@lemmy.today 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Erewhon: or, Over the Range (/ˈɛr.ɛ.hwɒn/, ERR-eh-hwon)[2] is a utopian novel by English writer Samuel Butler, first published in 1872,[3] set in a fictional country discovered and explored by the protagonist. The book is a satire on Victorian society.[4]

In Erewhon, illness is crime and crime is illness. As a result, citizens are imprisoned for offenses like physical ailments, misfortune, or ugliness while those who commit conventional crimes like fraud or theft are seen more sympathetically as exhibiting symptoms of moral afflictions and prescribed sessions with a "straightener" (essentially a psychologist) for treatment.[5]

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 points 2 months ago

That is suspiciously close to "Nowhere" spelled backward.

parent

[+] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -26 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (9 children)

So I guess you're pretty fine with the pedo/misogynist/nazi/bullying shit happening on Discord servers.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 21 points 2 months ago*

"You hate hotdogs? YOU MUST LOVE BURGERS THEN"

What are you even trying to say?

parent

[–] undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 9 points 2 months ago (7 children)

What do Discord servers have to do with anything??

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[+] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -8 points 2 months ago (6 children)

What does the fact that leaving kids unsupervised can lead to bad shit have to do with the issue at hand?

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

In this case, we have to look at the parents, how can you be so irresponsable that you need a government and a company to look after YOUR child?

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

Everything can be true at same time ie that parents need to be more present (what capitalism helps to not be the case), that companies need to be made accountable for what happens in their platforms (what they don't want), and that governments in the interest of the betterment of all society need to preemptively avoid the worst scenarios of societal unhealthiness (prevention is cheaper than treatment). What I don't understand is the willingness of Feddit to bend the knees to the man with money's will instead of accomodate the collective will of all society through State policies.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

What does Feddit have to do with all this?

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Feddit, Italy, you. You tell me.

parent

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 3 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

What I don't understand is the willingness of Feddit to bend the knees to the man with money's will instead of accomodate the collective will of all society through State policies. feddit

What does that have to do with Feddit .it? I don't care a fuck what .org did, it has nothing to do with me, Feddit.it nor with the convo

Italy

Uuh, what my country has to do with all that, again? Yep, our government is shit but i don't see what they have to do here

you

Me? What i did? I don't agree with your view of gettin childs lulled by companies and governments instead of their parents?

Shut up the fuck up please

Edit: should i bring the fact that you are from lemmy.ml?

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago*

Yes you should because you have liberal views (akin to freaking Margaret Thatcher) and I don't. Let's end it here.

parent

[–] Laser@feddit.org 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'm pretty sure AI partners are not the primary reason people don't have human partners. The issues are systematic and root very deeply. While I do think AI partners are a very toxic and dangerous way out of this, I highly doubt they were the reason people were single in the first place.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[+] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml -13 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

I'm pretty sure alcohol is not the primary reason people don't drive responsibly. The issues are systematic and root very deeply. While I do think driving while drunk is a very toxic and dangerous way out of this, I highly doubt they were the reason people were ebrious in the first place.

parent