Why Impose A Two Child Policy For The Filipino Family?
Why Impose A Two Child Policy For The Filipino Family?
It is used for
some population groups in China, has previously been used in Vietnam [1], and has lately been
discussed in the Philippines. Although not by law, citizens of Hong Kong are also highly
encouraged to have two children as a limit, and it is used as part of the region's family planning
strategies.
The belief that population growth is the primary reason for poverty is a great fallacy. In
fact, it has long been proven to be fallacious.
This belief was first espoused by Prof. Robert Malthus (University of Cambridge, 1785)
but was proven false by Prof. Simon Kuznets one hundred seventy three years later.
For disproving the fallacy, Kuznets was awarded the Noble Prize in Economics, in 1971.
This Principle of Malthus, that population grows geometrically while production grows
arithmetically, became the basic assumptions in his Theory on the Iron Law of Wages
which he posited was the primary reason behind poverty in Europe at the start of the
Industrial Revolution.
However, Simon Kuznets was able to validate scientifically that Malthus was all wrong
because economic growth is fastest during the time that the population growth was
highest. This was validated in Europe during the 100 years industrialization of the
European continent. Prof. Yamamoto of Japan, held the same conviction also, based on
his observation that the economic growth in Japan was the highest during the 1970’s.
He was referring to the dramatic economic takeover of Japan in the World Market for
cars and electronic products during the last three decades of the 20th Century. The
main reason for this correlation between population growth and economic growth is
simple – there was an increase in the demand pool in the population that grew. There
were more buyers for products made, so naturally production grew and employment
grew, and poverty was eradicated.
The natural and expected result in the equation however did not happen in the
Philippines, because purchasing power was removed from the population that grew.
People could not buy because they had no money; and they had no money because
they had no jobs or income earnings. The earnings that could easily have gone on to
the people through industry were siphoned off by payments to a ballooning international
and domestic debt, by tremendous tax cuts and tax holidays being given to foreign
investments prejudicial to the internal economic growth of the country and most of all by
the shameful and rampant corruption in the government. Instead of the people earning,
it is the government official and a select few who were making all the money.
Against this perspective, we therefore present our inevitable conviction that the
proposed measure to limit family size to only 2 children is a useless exercise in
demagoguery and an admission of failure. It is convenient for politicians to attack
population when they are out of remedies for the country’s extreme poverty due to their
unabated graft and corruption and because they are not willing to plug the leakage of
income to only a select few. Poverty is the result of the connivance between
government and the oligarchy to keep the ordinary Filipino out of the growth and
expansion of the Philippine economy. Consider that there is no clear and sincere
economic policy formulated in this country to lighten the load of ordinary Filipinos.
Today, the national economy of this sovereign country is no longer ours anymore. We
have already lost our middle income group. People are poor because our leaders prefer
them to be ignorant and poor; because as ignorant and poor, they can easily be
manipulated to vote for those corrupt politicians whose main ambition is solely to enrich
themselves at the expense of the people.
Sad facts to ponder are that today, almost half of the population are entrapped in
poverty that is not of their own making and are experiencing literal hunger and
deprivation of human rights.
While we agree that prudence must be employed to determine the right size of the
family for everyone, we are grievously concerned that some of our lawmakers are
dangerously treading on moral grounds which are no longer the safe purview of
economics. Life is never an area that can be manipulated by people, let alone
politicians. This is not their turf. Let the one who creates life determine how it should be
dispensed.
(Author is an economist and Director of the Social Research Center of the University of
Santo Tomas, Manila. He is also a member of the worldwide Society of Catholic Social
Scientists of the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Steubenville, Ohio, USA.)
• The Two-Child Policy
Posted Friday, July 24, 2009 10:17 AM | By William Saletan
Oops!
Remember that Chinese policy of restricting most couples
to one child? Apparently, the bean counters in Shanghai
(actually, they're human-being counters) have changed
their minds. According to Reuters:
Shanghai is urging eligible couples to have two children
as worries about the looming liability of an aging
population outweighs concerns about over-stretched
resources, a city official said on Friday. The policy marks the first time in decades
Chinese officials have actively encouraged procreation. ... More children would help
relieve the heavy pressure from aging people, said Zhang Meixin, a spokesman for the
Shanghai Municipal Population and Family Planning Commission ...
The U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies warned in April that by
2050 China ... will have just 1.6 working-age adults to support every person aged 60
and above, compared with 7.7 in 1975. ... China's underfunded state pension system
and shrinking family size has removed a traditional layer of support for elders, leaving
society ill-prepared to cope with an aging population.
You don't say.
This is the main problem with central family planning (if you don't count the tyranny).
Centralized systems are more farsighted but less sensitive and adaptive than
decentralized systems. Look at abortion rates in nontotalitarian countries: They go up or
down in conjunction with economic indicators. Each woman decides how big a family
she can afford and whether now is a good time to have a baby. Sure, there are outliers
and mistakes. But overall, the crowd of procreators acts prudently. And when
circumstances change, family size adjusts accordingly.
Centralized systems interfere with this natural dynamic. They make it harder to change
course. And they never seem to learn that the problem is centralization itself.
So good luck, Shanghai being counters. May your generational ledgers even out,
despite you.
registered residents," said Zhang Meixin, time that China needs to change
its strict family planning rules.
a spokesman for the city's Municipal
Population and Family Planning
Commission. If the country continues as it is,
Leaflet campaign the proportion of elderly people in
He said the current average number of society will continue to increase.
children born to a woman over her This is a problem because it will
the policy, it would definitely help relieve But central government officials
have consistently ruled out
pressure in the long term," he added.
changing the national family
Decades of a strictly enforced one-child
planning policy.
policy has produced new strains across
They still believe that China has
the population and prompted exceptions
too many people - an opinion
in some family categories. Rural parents
shared by almost everyone in the
are also allowed to have a second child, country.
if the first-born is a girl. That has left individual cities, such
In Shanghai, family planning officials and as Shanghai, to think up ways of
volunteers will make home visits and slip coping with their own ageing
leaflets under doors to encourage communities.
couples to have a second child if both
grew up as only children.
Emotional and financial counselling will also be provided, officials said.
By 2020, the country's most populous city is expected to have more than a
third of residents aged 60 or above.
Policy relaxed
According to the US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, by
2050 the country will have just 1.6 working-age adults to support each
retired person, compared to 7.7 in 1975. CHINA'S ONE-CHILD POLICY
The state-controlled newspaper China Written into the constitution in
Daily quoted one salesman who said he 1978
Top of Form
n ew s ukfs GO
new s
Botto
m of
Form
Advanced
search options
"We consider two children is a very reasonable fertility level China vows to overhaul courts
for our country," says Mr Duc.
Abortion Koreas trade fresh war of words
One reason why Vietnam is holding back from a one-child Philippines Church apologises for sex
policy is a fear the population's gender balance would be
abuse
affected.
"In so called chopstick culture countries - like Vietnam, Search for 'spy' pilots in China
China, Korea, Japan and Taiwan - there is still a strong son
preference." added Mr Duc. Chinese chemical spill kills 13
"If you have a one-child policy many couple will try to have
only a boy." Malaysian state passes Islamic law
There are already over 900,000 officially registered Vietnam's unburied soldiers head home
abortions in Vietnam each year.
In many cases people use abortion as a form of
contraception. But as modern technology makes it easier to
identify the sex of a foetus, abortions can be used to ensure Links to more Asia-Pacific stories are
the birth of a son rather than a daughter. at the foot of the page.
[Improve]
The benefits of a two-child policy are in direct relation to the parents ability to adequately
provide for them. The social impact is even more significant because it would determine the
housing and economic needs of the entire society and its ability to sustain the population
increase.
Note: There are comments associated with this question. See the discussion page to add to the
conversation
Church: "Two-child policy is anti-family"