wrong. We on the other subsequent investigation,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]campcanineusa###/casa.asp?page=abercrombie-milano/]abercrombie milano], want to wait out the real statistics,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]john-morton###/]giubbotti peuterey], the results to wait fifteen years, twenty years, there have been more than 20 national census, but never wait until the "real statistics." In fact, we see is real. Low birth rate has long been reflected in the statistics,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]glenlocharsoups###/]hollister homme], but we respond, however, feel that there is a problem.0 p" l* \, u1 d y9 ^8 S$ M, S! X0 n
the general trend is irreversible, but we must find ways to relieve that slow the aging process, low birth rate is not so serious, so that most of the elderly population in the future when there are a lot of new successor. This demographic process is uniform. In this population stage,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]hiplille.fr/nike-air-max-1/]nike air max 1], you still care about that Jinjin had tens of thousands of people a year, it is unwise, is not it?Publicly questioned the fertility data,[url=http://woaijuben###/home.php?mod=space&uid=580]http://woaijuben###/home.php?mod=space&uid=580], some people say I on glue"News Geek": Why do you doubt the official before fertility data?Guo Zhigang: Strictly speaking, my main suspect is the judgment of the situation before the Family Planning Commission. Nearly two decades of administrations have insisted that the fertility rate of 1.8, which is impossible. From their data and the National Bureau of Statistics demographic data to analyze, the fertility rate has been declining, far below the 1.8. The findings of its caliber that much difference with the government.9 E6 }% z( A3 v; I# |
can be reduced to the replacement level, and slowly put the population to stabilize. In fact, one of the purposes of long-term stability in the population replacement level is to ensure that not to rise to development trends, the purpose of the second is the timely adjustment of population structure, not to the pursuit of lower fertility and fewer born,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]le-millesime.fr/air-max-pas-cher-chine/]air max pas cher chine], because that population structure will be deformed,[url=http://bbs.superdata###.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=59671&do=blog&quickforward=1&id=727976]http://bbs.superdata###.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=59671&do=blog&quickforward=1&id=727976],[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]marcelbaey.fr/?cat=8]jordan pas cher], too fast to reduce the future population.China's total population,[url=http://kaito1412###/kid/bbs/apeboard_plus.cgi?command=viewres&target=801162/]http://kaito1412###/kid/bbs/apeboard_plus.cgi?command=viewres&target=801162/],[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]leadgenerationskills.co/]magasin hollister], once in 2030 and even before it reaches a maximum, after the population will be reduced,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]benefitsme.co/]abercrombie soldes], we enter the peak of population aging, demographic change slowly, if we can be close to the replacement level of fertility and generally stabilized I guess 100 years can generally form a homogeneous age structure of it."News Geek": 100 years?Guo Zhigang: Yes, because demographic change is a long-cycle process, the former base of the old saying, long period of inertia is strong. Inertia is the impact of the existing population and its structure, which determines the future demographic trends. To recover from the current demographic profile malformation to a uniform state,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]le-millesime.fr/chaussures-nike-tn-pas-cher/]chaussures nike tn pas cher], the number of births to long-term stability,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]cadovino.fr]barbour france], have to wait a population of roughly quit,[url=http://games.renren###/bbs/home.php?mod=space&uid=102365]http://games.renren###/bbs/home.php?mod=space&uid=102365], and now people have a life expectancy of seven or eight years old, a hundred there, so I said a hundred year.Population really need forward-looking. Economy out of the question Huanguo Lai sometimes two or three years, once the population out of the problem is difficult to tune. From the point of view of aging.1 L& z- h* I H9 m$ d3 C- t( N
that an aging population and negative population growth will give the social and economic development will cause great difficulties, because the population is the main community."News Geek": how to be considered a smooth ride?Guo Zhigang: with today's fertility policy adjustments are related. Child born today to 2035 is 20 years old, just starting work, and if you want to be able to have more that in 2035 there are more people in the future of young, able to support the aging,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]hr-home.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=38534][第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]hr-home.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=38534], relatively easier to solve this problem."News Geek": To change the current population structure irrational about how many years?Guo Zhigang: This is a very big problem. Some scholars say China 30 years ago,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]hiplille.fr/tn/]tn], 700 million people is better, but it was a lot of opposition demographers say can not be 700 million as a goal.
/ C% ^$ g! K9 [$ d) t$ E aged 60 and older population is likely to be close to 500 million. Contemporary Chinese proportion of elderly over 60 years is about 15%,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]campcanineusa###/casa.asp?page=abercrombie-outlet/]abercrombie outlet], the degree of aging in the world, also ranked the wrong person. But our aging very fast, when aged 60 or older by 2050 the proportion of about 35%, provided that low fertility have been partially resolved. Solve more better, can be reduced to about 30%, it is possible to solve poorly close to 40%.Although aging is irreversible, but there relieve space. When the elderly population in 2050, just 20 years old to 60 years old now,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]goti-death###/ayane/BBS/apeboard_plus.cgi/[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]goti-death###/ayane/BBS/apeboard_plus.cgi/][第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]goti-death###/ayane/BBS/apeboard_plus.cgi/[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]goti-death###/ayane/BBS/apeboard_plus.cgi/], and is very likely to survive to that time. We are now less population pyramid top, middle particular drum, the following and thin, which is the central bulge of the population out of that chunk, at that time in old age, and now the risk of death decreased life expectancy, so certainly not hit 450 million people live. This can not be changed, the problem is who is going to support when the elderly population,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]zgzysy###/bbs/home.php?mod=space&uid=12617][第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]zgzysy###/bbs/home.php?mod=space&uid=12617], the number of working-age population.As this chunk grow older, more and more older people, aging more and more prominent,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]momo-beach###/]peuterey 2015], in 2030 this problem is quite prominent, and in 2050 will be close to the maximum value of aging. If we can successfully weather the 2030 to 2070 this period, China's demographic transition on the basic victory ended. If not quite the past.! s& M. E0 k; g* @) A, v4 w
such as our survey was 1.2,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]poppolu.it]woolrich outlet online], 1.3,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]marcelbaey.fr/?cat=5]air max one], 1.4 times the census is,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]eye2eyecreativegroup.net/]chaussure femme pas cher], but they always say 1.8, the gap is great, it is very dangerous.I realize that China should be regarded as a relatively early fertility may really low. In the 1990 national census, the total fertility rate is still above 2.3, by 1995 only 1.3 a few. 1980 to 1990 fertility rate hovering,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]giochidielio.it]moncler italia],[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]aocs.org.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=171107&do=blog&quickforward=1&id=1189423][第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]aocs.org.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=171107&do=blog&quickforward=1&id=1189423], almost did not reduce, so then we have to admit to reduce fertility quite hard, require long-term efforts. By 1990 only 2.3. Unexpectedly, when the 1992 Family Planning Commission survey of fertility are less than 1.6, and when we first saw the fertility rate at the replacement level (2.1) or less, a couple not to have two,[url=[第一私募论坛]http://www.simu001.cn]startappz.co/]barbour lyon], and only 1.6 All people's reaction is to this investigation bungled. |
|手机版|Archiver|
( 桂ICP备12001440号-3 )|网站地图
发表于 2016-1-3 14:17:34