GZERO Media logo

Snapshot Of China: Not Enough (Women In) Labor

Snapshot Of China: Not Enough (Women In) Labor

These days, the most populous country in the world has a surprising problem: not enough people. Although China has 1.4 billion citizens, the government is worried that it’s falling short: with too few people of working age to sustain high levels of economic growth and support retirees and too few women for more than half a billion fellaz out there looking for love.


How’d we get here?

In the first two decades after Mao took power in 1949 – when China’s population was about one-third what it is today – the government actively encouraged “hero mothers” to have as many children as possible, as a patriotic duty. But by the 1970s fears of housing and food shortages caused the government to change tack, encouraging voluntary family planning to reduce birth rates. Not satisfied with the results, party leaders in 1979 instituted the now-infamous “one-child policy,” which applied to most Chinese living in cities. The policy was brutal but effective – birth rates fell by half, and population growth slowed.

But now, as a result, the government is worried that it has too few working age men and women to support continued rapid economic growth – the mainstay of the Communist Party’s authoritarian legitimacy and China’s aspirations for global power.

There are also concerns about who, exactly, will support and care for China’s increasingly elderly population. And lastly, because hundreds of millions of Chinese chose – or were forced – to abort female children during all those years of “one-child” restrictions, the gender ratio is hugely skewed towards men. Some estimates say there are 30 million more men than women of marriageable age now – a recipe for social discontent and instability.

So what’s the government going to do about it? Reports suggest party leaders are looking to do away with child restrictions altogether (the one-child limit was, in fact, already raised to two-children in 2016 – with little discernible effect). As if to make the point, the government’s recently unveiled Year of the Pig postage stamp depicts a porcine family featuring not one, not two, but three little piglets.

But it’s not so easy to boost birth rates. Punishments and restrictions on child-rearing are quite effective at forcing people not to have children. But encouraging them to have children is a lot harder. Atop the softer intangibles of personal attraction, there are hard considerations about whether having more children is even affordable. Higher housing and education prices make people less willing to have large families. In addition, boosting birth rates can have adverse effects on female participation in the labor force – an area in which President Xi Jinping’s record is already abysmal.

Governments around the world have, with few exceptions, generally fared poorly with schemes meant to boost fertility. Unless China can find a way to be the exception, the Chinese dream may go gray before it becomes golden.

A decade ago, Bank of America established the Global Ambassadors Program with Vital Voices, and the results are phenomenal. We've provided 8,000 hours of training and mentoring, engaging 400 women from 85 countries and helping women around the world build their businesses.

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has made a lot of foreign governments really mad. Let's call the roll.

Europe. The EU is angry that Turkey is drilling for oil in the eastern Mediterranean, and NATO is furious that member Turkey has defied its protests to purchase S-400 missiles from Russia. Erdogan has repeatedly rejected pushback from EU leaders by calling them fascists and Islamophobes.

Just this week, Erdogan refused to express sympathy with France following the beheading of a French schoolteacher by an Islamist extremist, attacked Macron's own response to the murder, suggested the French president needed "some sort of mental treatment," and countered Macron's vow to crack down on Islamist radicals with calls for a boycott of French products.

More Show less

Less than a week before the US election, President Donald Trump is repeatedly questioning the legitimacy of the vote (if he doesn't win) over largely unsubstantiated claims of potential fraud in universal mail-in voting. But with absentee ballots coming in all-time highs in all states due to the coronavirus pandemic, some Americans worry that the system itself may not be able to handle such an influx of ballots, including those already cast by a record number of early voters. Whether or not you agree, Gallup data show that US citizens are now less confident that the election will be conducted accurately — and more concerned about election irregularities and voter suppression — than they were four years ago. We take a look at how Americans' views on these electoral integrity issues have changed from 2016 to 2020.

Belarus on strike: In recent days, the Belarusian streets have turned up the heat on strongman President Alexander Lukashenko, as thousands of state factory workers and students in Belarus heeded a call from opposition leader Svyatlana Tikhanouskaya to join a general strike. Protests have roiled the country since August, when Lukashenko, in power since 1994, won a presidential election widely regarded as rigged. Last Sunday, 100,000 people turned up in Minsk, the capital. Tikhanouskaya — who ran against Lukashenko in that election and is currently exiled in neighboring Lithuania — had demanded the president resign by October 26. When he didn't, the walkout began. In one of the most iconic moments of protest so far, a striking worker at a refrigerator factory climbed the plant's tower to record a dramatic call for Lukashenko to step down. Belarus has been hit with sanctions from the US and EU, both of which are calling on him to hold new elections, but so far he has shown no signs of backing down, deploying his riot police with the usual fury. Something's got to give, soon.

More Show less

Who does Vladimir Putin want to win the US election? Given the Kremlin's well-documented efforts to sway the 2016 vote in Donald Trump's favor, it's certainly a fair question. And while there's no solid evidence that Russian interference had any decisive effect on the outcome four years ago, the Trump administration itself says the Kremlin — and others — are now trying to mess with the election again.

So let's put you in Vladimir Putin's size 9 shoes as you weigh up Donald Trump vs Joe Biden while refreshing your own personal PyatTridsatVosem (FiveThirtyEight) up there in the Kremlin.

More Show less
UNGA banner

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's Newsletter: Signal