4 ms·

Misread graph. Removed comment.

by TimPC 5y ago

robjan 5y ago
There is still a male surplus and culturally people still prefer to have boys because they carry their family name. Girls are married out of the family and if your one child is a girl there will be nobody to look after you in your old age.
- thefounder 5y ago
  >> there will be nobody to look after you in your old age. What a sick, selfish society. If you can't take care of yourself maybe it's time to go?
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    What a sick little comment. The world is a lot larger than the rich West and historically children were what we have - in some wealthy places - a social security system for. But in many places where the state is barely functional and family ties are strong children tend to take care of their elders, because that's how it's been traditionally. The best way to reduce that factor in how many children people have is to up the standard of living, which more or less automatically reduces the number of children people will have because they no longer need to worry that much about their old age. On another note: those societies have - of necessity - much stronger family ties than that same rich West, so something valuable is lost along with the social needs.
    - thefounder 5y ago
      It looks like in China it's even a law[1] that old people use to take advantage of their children. Just because it's a "tradition" doesn't make it good. It's been a "tradition" to beat your wife and children as well in many parts of the world or even worse. If you are miserable why would you like to make your children's life miserable as well? [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422934/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422934/
      - drdec 5y ago
        In the USA we have a similar law that allows older people to use the resources of younger people to survive. We call it social security. My point is just that sometimes things seem very different in other cultures but are not so different when you drill down. In both cultures we recognize that the elderly deserve to be taken care of. We just get to that goal in different ways. Neither one is prima facie better than the other and each had advantages and disadvantages.
      - tehwebguy 5y ago
        You should know they have this in Pennsylvania too
      - topkai22 5y ago
        Some states in the US have variations on this type of law: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws
      - jacquesm 5y ago
        When you're in a hole: stop digging. Really, this has absolutely no bearing on the discussion. Bringing spousal and child abuse into this is ridiculous. And even in the affluent West it isn't all that rare to find children caring for their elders: it's perfectly ok, even if there is a tendency to stick old people in old folks homes and to try to forget about them even though they are still alive that definitely isn't something everybody subscribes to. Those that came before us deserve some respect and care in their old age, they are still family. The COVID-19 epidemic has brought out one thing quite clearly: that there are people who wouldn't care one bit whether older people die off en masse. I wonder what the overlap is between those egoists and the ones that want to live forever.
        thefounder 5y ago
        "Tradition" is often used to justify all kind of behaviours(many times abusive behaviours) so I don't think my remark is that misplaced. I'm not a fan of gerontocracy "traditions"/laws regardless if they originate in China, Italy or the U.S either. I would not ask someone to take care of myself if I'm unable to do so. I think it's fairer to make sure the world you leave behind is prosperous and equitable enough instead to rely on close relatives or invisible powers to take care of you when you innevitable become old. Make sure you get paid well enough during your youth so that you can live off your own savings/pension when you become a zombie.

Misread graph. Removed comment.

by TimPC 5y ago

Misread graph. Removed comment.

There is still a male surplus and culturally people still prefer to have boys because they carry their family name. Girls are married out of the family and if your one child is a girl there will be nobody to look after you in your old age.

thefounder 5y ago
>> there will be nobody to look after you in your old age. What a sick, selfish society. If you can't take care of yourself maybe it's time to go?
- jacquesm 5y ago
  What a sick little comment. The world is a lot larger than the rich West and historically children were what we have - in some wealthy places - a social security system for. But in many places where the state is barely functional and family ties are strong children tend to take care of their elders, because that's how it's been traditionally. The best way to reduce that factor in how many children people have is to up the standard of living, which more or less automatically reduces the number of children people will have because they no longer need to worry that much about their old age. On another note: those societies have - of necessity - much stronger family ties than that same rich West, so something valuable is lost along with the social needs.
  - thefounder 5y ago
    It looks like in China it's even a law[1] that old people use to take advantage of their children. Just because it's a "tradition" doesn't make it good. It's been a "tradition" to beat your wife and children as well in many parts of the world or even worse. If you are miserable why would you like to make your children's life miserable as well? [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422934/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422934/
    - drdec 5y ago
      In the USA we have a similar law that allows older people to use the resources of younger people to survive. We call it social security. My point is just that sometimes things seem very different in other cultures but are not so different when you drill down. In both cultures we recognize that the elderly deserve to be taken care of. We just get to that goal in different ways. Neither one is prima facie better than the other and each had advantages and disadvantages.
    - tehwebguy 5y ago
      You should know they have this in Pennsylvania too
    - topkai22 5y ago
      Some states in the US have variations on this type of law: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_responsibility_laws
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      When you're in a hole: stop digging. Really, this has absolutely no bearing on the discussion. Bringing spousal and child abuse into this is ridiculous. And even in the affluent West it isn't all that rare to find children caring for their elders: it's perfectly ok, even if there is a tendency to stick old people in old folks homes and to try to forget about them even though they are still alive that definitely isn't something everybody subscribes to. Those that came before us deserve some respect and care in their old age, they are still family. The COVID-19 epidemic has brought out one thing quite clearly: that there are people who wouldn't care one bit whether older people die off en masse. I wonder what the overlap is between those egoists and the ones that want to live forever.
      - thefounder 5y ago
        "Tradition" is often used to justify all kind of behaviours(many times abusive behaviours) so I don't think my remark is that misplaced. I'm not a fan of gerontocracy "traditions"/laws regardless if they originate in China, Italy or the U.S either. I would not ask someone to take care of myself if I'm unable to do so. I think it's fairer to make sure the world you leave behind is prosperous and equitable enough instead to rely on close relatives or invisible powers to take care of you when you innevitable become old. Make sure you get paid well enough during your youth so that you can live off your own savings/pension when you become a zombie.