Chinese activist and exiled dissident Chen Guangchen has waded into the controversy surrounding working conditions at the Chinese suppliers of big name tech brands by calling on Apple and others to stand up against his country’s infamous one child policy. Self-taught lawyer Chen became something of a local hero and thorn in the …
Because what the world so desperately needs is vast, cash rich multi national corporations spreading their legendary largesse by getting into political activism...
Yeah, that's what Apple really needs to focus on. Getting people to breed more. We just don't have enough people.
A win - win situation for Apple....
They get to look like they are standing up for the people and they get more child laborers.
Why would anyone want to defy this policy? In fact, it should be rolled out across the entire world. Just imagine how much nicer Britain would be if chav families could only have one of their appalling offspring instead of the usual 12.
Keep a generation gap
Try wearing a cap - The Specials AKA
Not forgetting that the chav generation cycle is about 14 years, too.
Problem with that is:
We need them to feed us all when we have all retired in ,30 years (hem)....
Besides, i do feel that the Majority shouldnt be punished for the fact a very small Minority annoy you.
My brother lives in a deprived area of Liverpool, where a lot of people are unemployed, and believe me, most of them are *not* like that.
I have no love for the Chinese government - but this is one policy I approve - even if their methods of upholding it is often extreme.
If only the skyfairy fans were not following their fairy tales about telling people to breed, not use condoms etc.
What the idiolistic tree huggers seem to have forgotten is the China *had* to introduce this; it's projected population growth was way outstripping it's available tech and resources at the time and it was a ticking timebomb.
Frankly there are some lessons (unpleasant though they may be) to learn here for other countries with population issues.
"There’s a huge social responsibility for these international corporations like Apple."
Er, no. This is short sighted to say the least. For one, Apple should not be getting involved in politics. China's problems are China's problems.
Second point; with a population of 1.3 BILLION and counting, who all need energy and resources (food etc), there is need for control. Yes, forced abortion is wrong, but passing laws and making people aware of the need to cap population numbers is necessary, or resources will deplete.
The problem is that it is just not possible to get people to moderate population growth on their own initiative. Most people seem to believe they have a right to have as many children as they want to. Unfortunately in Britain we pay them MORE for each one.
It should be necessary to have a license before making even more mouths to feed.
"...if chav families could only have one of their appalling offspring instead of the usual 12."
They don't need a population control act to stop that problem.
The solution is a simple one. Don't give them child benefits for 2nd or 3rd child onwards.
We'll still pay for one or two, because sometimes even nice people have problems and need support.
But what we won't do is pay for your army or make purpose built houses that size/knock through existing houses.
When they know they will have to pay for their brats, they will keep knees together or use protection.
Lots of downvotes for perfectly sensible non-soylent-green methods of population control.
And the downvoter's solutions to the problems of large populations are....? Just ignore it and carry on as normal?
I am a parent of 2 who is considering a third, but I agree, after 2 kids, no more benefits, no large houses...
Re: Poulation awareness
Yeah, these are all fun things to think about. Practicality rears its ugly head, though.
The side-effect of NOT giving assistance to poor people having too many kids is a permanent slave class (with associated crime rate and bizarre Mad Max-esque neighborhoods, like Detroit).
The state could snatch the extra kids away, but then again, you'd have to have a lot more trust in the government than I have in mine, and as far as I know, orphanages have not yet been scoured clean of available children that people are ALREADY given away without prompting.
You could just kill the mothers, and let the extra babies go down with the ship (okay, that's from Birdcage).
You could perform some kind of reversible sterilization on each and every child ever born, to be reversed only--and only so long as--they choose to have a governmentally-allowed child (based on their scientifically-determined Genetic Quotient, of course. I think that's from the Pliocene Exile tetrology). We'll have to wait on the technology for the safe sterilization and the ethically-pure telepathic Unity for the decision-making process, though.
In a mans world.
Why shouldn't a woman in any part of the world be able to follow and develop a career, if she chooses to, balance that with having children if she chooses to and why shouldn't men be comfortable mutually supporting the choice of their partners in this and take on the principle role of looking after the children - why, because of stupid, outdated ideologies, religious and ethnic 'traditions', very little social advancement since the neolithic and male-led political self perpetuation that's why.
People will only self-manage their immediate populations if they have; no political / religious intervention, access to education, knowledge, transparency of information about family planning and sufficient earnings such that they no longer need to rely on the age old practice of sending the kids out to work rather than into education.
So, whilst China's solution hasn't worked very well at all, in part because the 'traditional value' of the male child still holds sway over females, but what were they meant to do when none of the above applied to the vast majority of their population.
There will always be richer and poorer in the world, but this gap can be narrowed for the benefit of all, by giving women and girls equal chances in education, greater self worth and self determination over reproduction.
So maybe any global business 'players' who want a piece of the action should espouse enhancing the lot of their female workers and think long-term for once.
Be careful what you wish for?
I can understand this guy wanting the 1000lb corporate gorilla to enter politics, assuming it'll be on his side in this particular issue, but even if they are right now, it's a dangerous line to cross.
Like others here, I really don't see anything wrong with the policy itself, just the way the government enforces it: indeed, I'd be delighted if more governments adopted tax incentives etc to that end, rather than promoting breeding on an already-crowded planet!
Re: Be careful what you wish for?
I'm not sure it's universal in all Indian states, but in Himachal Pradesh at least you are ineligible to sit on the local Panchayat (local government) if you have more than two kids. I think the quota of subsidised sugar, rice etc in the hill states also only applies to the first two children.
The friend who told me this also recounted his experience of the "Knackers for transistor radios" policy pursued by Indira Gandhi in the 70's, generally considered a disastrous setback for population control in India. As a young bloke of 15 or so he was forced to hide in the local forest for a few days (apparently he had plenty of company) when the team responsible for carrying out the policy came to town, armed with a quota they were keen to fill. The team would simply go out into the fields and grab any male within spitting distance of breeding age, drag them back to the temporary clinic (reputedly rather unhygenic) and have their family jewels disconnected before they could say "No thank you, I already have a rather nice radio".
Has Mr. Chen formulated a detailed flan of attack on how the Chinese eonomy is going to support 2.5 billion inhabitants with a reasonable standar of living ? I'm quite interested.
"...Has Mr. Chen formulated a detailed flan of attack...?
Ooh. Is there going to be a big custard pie fight, then?
Big litters mean big problems.
In poverty stricken countries they have big litters so the few that survived could look after them in old age.
All this does is perpetuate suffering so you really have to applaud China here.
If they worked for Samsung ...
They wouldn't have time to have more than one kid
I can think of a solution.
It's even green. Soylent...
Re: I can think of a solution.
Soylent Green, flavour varies from person to person :-D
The Chinese government is mostly led by trained and qualified engineers. Whereas Apple is apparently led by soft-headed executives whose main skill is wishful thinking.
Criticize the Chinese government's methods if you will - but how would you enforce the one-child policy? I can imagine a future - not so far away - in which people are standing packed cheek-by-jowl, starving, desperate for fresh water, but happy because their human rights have been respected.
As far as overpopulation is concerned, prevention is better than cure. Unfortunately we are now well past the stage where prevention would have been timely; that was about 100 years ago. As for those who believe that "God will provide" - yes, he will, but you won't like WHAT he provides.
" As for those who believe that "God will provide" - yes, he will, but you won't like WHAT he provides".
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. (Plague, War, Famine, Death).
How would I enforce it?
I would have mandatory birth control implants after the birth of a first child.
I would also offer large bonuses to people who choose to adopt and not have their own children.
and finally I would make a large effort to change perceptions so girls have equal status in the populations eyes!
1) That tech is only recently available in the first world. Also assumes there isn't a profitable black market in having them removed again (interesting asside: for a number of decades the US actively worked against allowing hormonal contraceptive tech. to get into China) .
2) Assumes there are a lot of Chileren available for adoption in China. There aren't actually that many, and most are either severely disabled or girls (the latter of which would be covered by your third point).
3) China has been actively trying to do this since the start of the policy.
So your ideas, while not bad, are nothing that hasn't been thought of decades ago.
More interesting stuff about the policy:
- It is actually a 'one birth' policy - you aren't penalised for having twins.
- If you are one of the less-prolific recognised 'racial' groups in China, it doesn't apply to you.
- If you are one of the 'endangered' 'racial' groups in China, you are encouraged and financially supported to have as many kids as you want.
Additional fact to your exacellent points:
it is one birth per marriage as well. So, if you get a divorce and remarry, you can have one birth with your new spouse.
I watched The Human Centipede...
... last night, and even though the crazy surgeon never actually says it, I think he's found the solution for the global food shortage. 1 meal going through 3 people... I bagsy the front place in my group though...
Paris because, she can eat shit too as far as I care!
It seems that ...
most of those commenting are much more anti-child than the Chinese government policy.
However, it'll do no harm to have it made clear that Apple are anti-children. Every time you bring out your iphone or whatever you're making a statement that you don't approve of children.
- iPad? More like iFAD: We reveal why Apple ran off to IBM
- +Analysis Microsoft: We're making ONE TRUE WINDOWS to rule us all
- Climate: 'An excuse for tax hikes', scientists 'don't know what they're talking about'
- Analysis Nadella: Apps must run on ALL WINDOWS – PCs, slabs and mobes
- Apple: We'll unleash OS X Yosemite beta on the MASSES July 24