5 ms·

I've heard that China is currently at it's demographic peak. From here on out people are aging with less replacing them, and more and more youth have to support

I've heard that China is currently at it's demographic peak. From here on out people are aging with less replacing them, and more and more youth have to support multiple grandparents (effect of one-child policy, which while no longer in effect still has lasting impact). As such I suppose if they were going to make a move now would be the time.

dundarious 5y ago
I don’t think their preferred tactic is a human wave attack anymore. They’re advanced now. Better to ensure the US stays out of open conflict, which probably still means playing the waiting game.
- eloff 5y ago
  The demographics are not a problem because of how they constrain the number of troops they can field - their population is still quadruple the US, so no problems there. The problem is the economic weakness that comes with a country where each working person supports two retired people (either directly as in family or indirectly as in taxes). That doesn't work as far as we know. So China is right near the peak of their power (maybe 15-30 years away.) I still think that means they'll be patient and wait for their moment. But they can't wait forever.
dirtyid 5y ago
This is one of the more idiotic extrapolations of demographic bomb. Even the one-child policy annual birth rate in China is ~9-10M per year. That's an incredible amount of bodies to recruit from for the needs of modern air / naval warfare with limited casualty potential. Around half of births will be from underclass, where becoming a military martyr for the cause of reunification would be the surest guarantee their family has a meal ticket for the rest of their lives. Throw in upward mobility incentives like preferential queuing for universities, real estate etc - there won’t be a manpower problem.
- someperson 5y ago
  Those military-age only children are expected to take care of their elderly parents and grandparents. In a world war over Taiwan, it's likely millions of them would die. Leaving each family as "bare branches" since they have no siblings. And eldest male children are especially important in Chinese culture. Given it would be a mass casualty conflict, the upward mobility "support the troops" impact (and guaranteed "meal tickets") would seem to be have a pretty limited.
  - dirtyid 5y ago
    Bare branches are already a reality due to one-child. See meme of military wives getting knocked up and married and leeching off military housing when troops deploy in the US. That's what will happen in PRC as well, deployed soldiers with increasing perks due to military modernization / restructuring will be some of the most competitive suitors. >likely millions of them would die It would not be a mass casualty conflict. People who don't follow the subject matter still assume PRC has antiquated military capabilities and relies on dangerous Normandy style amphib invasion. Reality is PRC will steamroll TW like US did Iraq, except force balance is even more lopsided towards PRC in quantity and quality. Logistics of taking TW in PRC backyard is multitudes easier than US occupying Iraq or Afghanistan across the globe. Taking TW without substantial losses is more or less foregone in most strategic thinking. The only concern is the risk of fighting the US on the sea, and that still caps casualties to sub 100,000s even if every PLA ship and plane was destroyed. Which bluntly, relative to other social programs at PRC scale, is a completely tolerable amount. Short of going nuclear, the limits of personnel loss in modern combat is not going to impact CCP political thinking.
    - someperson 5y ago
      > Taking TW without substantial losses is more or less foregone in most strategic thinking. Do you have a source for this? Everything I've read says that the PLA Navy would struggle to take Taiwan even without US involvement. Amphibious landings are the hardest thing in all of warfare, especially since landings can only occur along a Taiwan's well-fortified beaches, and not along its rocky cliff coastline and given the Taiwanese are dug-in and well-armed.
mc32 5y ago
There is also a sex imbalance that could result in tens of millions of un-paired male adults because of the one child policy. These are men who will not be able to compete against more attractive men (money, power, influence rather than looks)

dundarious 5y ago

I don’t think their preferred tactic is a human wave attack anymore. They’re advanced now. Better to ensure the US stays out of open conflict, which probably still means playing the waiting game.

eloff 5y ago
The demographics are not a problem because of how they constrain the number of troops they can field - their population is still quadruple the US, so no problems there. The problem is the economic weakness that comes with a country where each working person supports two retired people (either directly as in family or indirectly as in taxes). That doesn't work as far as we know. So China is right near the peak of their power (maybe 15-30 years away.) I still think that means they'll be patient and wait for their moment. But they can't wait forever.

dirtyid 5y ago

This is one of the more idiotic extrapolations of demographic bomb. Even the one-child policy annual birth rate in China is ~9-10M per year. That's an incredible amount of bodies to recruit from for the needs of modern air / naval warfare with limited casualty potential. Around half of births will be from underclass, where becoming a military martyr for the cause of reunification would be the surest guarantee their family has a meal ticket for the rest of their lives. Throw in upward mobility incentives like preferential queuing for universities, real estate etc - there won’t be a manpower problem.

someperson 5y ago
Those military-age only children are expected to take care of their elderly parents and grandparents. In a world war over Taiwan, it's likely millions of them would die. Leaving each family as "bare branches" since they have no siblings. And eldest male children are especially important in Chinese culture. Given it would be a mass casualty conflict, the upward mobility "support the troops" impact (and guaranteed "meal tickets") would seem to be have a pretty limited.
- dirtyid 5y ago
  Bare branches are already a reality due to one-child. See meme of military wives getting knocked up and married and leeching off military housing when troops deploy in the US. That's what will happen in PRC as well, deployed soldiers with increasing perks due to military modernization / restructuring will be some of the most competitive suitors. >likely millions of them would die It would not be a mass casualty conflict. People who don't follow the subject matter still assume PRC has antiquated military capabilities and relies on dangerous Normandy style amphib invasion. Reality is PRC will steamroll TW like US did Iraq, except force balance is even more lopsided towards PRC in quantity and quality. Logistics of taking TW in PRC backyard is multitudes easier than US occupying Iraq or Afghanistan across the globe. Taking TW without substantial losses is more or less foregone in most strategic thinking. The only concern is the risk of fighting the US on the sea, and that still caps casualties to sub 100,000s even if every PLA ship and plane was destroyed. Which bluntly, relative to other social programs at PRC scale, is a completely tolerable amount. Short of going nuclear, the limits of personnel loss in modern combat is not going to impact CCP political thinking.
  - someperson 5y ago
    > Taking TW without substantial losses is more or less foregone in most strategic thinking. Do you have a source for this? Everything I've read says that the PLA Navy would struggle to take Taiwan even without US involvement. Amphibious landings are the hardest thing in all of warfare, especially since landings can only occur along a Taiwan's well-fortified beaches, and not along its rocky cliff coastline and given the Taiwanese are dug-in and well-armed.

mc32 5y ago

There is also a sex imbalance that could result in tens of millions of un-paired male adults because of the one child policy. These are men who will not be able to compete against more attractive men (money, power, influence rather than looks)