& lt high score > I am anxious for the second debate. Our view is that the non-family planning policy should not be liberalized.

At present, the debate on population has become heated, and whether to let the second child birth become the focus of controversy. Some people worry that if the second child is released, the population will be out of control and the fertility rate will be greatly improved. In fact, common sense tells us that if the second child is released, the fertility rate will still be lower than the replacement level of 2. 1, the population size will be smaller, and the total population will still decrease, which is in line with the purpose of controlling population growth.

As for the release of the second child now, how big will the fertility rate be? Considering from the following aspects, we can see that the fertility rate will not be too high. First, the proportion of one child is about 20%; Second, the imbalance between men and women leads to bachelor. According to the census data 1982, men account for about 6%; Third, the infertility rate accounts for about 7% of the total population; Fourth, the proportion of voluntary single men and women and Dink family population is about 5%; Fifth, the proportion of disabled people in China is large, and the ability of bearing and raising children is weak; Sixth, there are160,000 homosexuals in China, and many people emigrate abroad every year; Seventh, the triplet rate is about 10%. According to this calculation, the total fertility rate is about 1.8.

My calculation may be on the high side, because in recent years, various statistical surveys on fertility desire show that China people's fertility desire is less than 1.8, and even lower after 80. For various reasons, the actual fertility rate will be lower than the fertility desire, just like some people want to live in a foreign house, but they can't actually afford it. The fertility rate of 1.8 is the best in China, which is approved by the Family Planning Commission.

Some people may say that under the current one-and-a-half-child policy, the actual fertility rate is 1.8, which will definitely be higher after the second child is released. Let's not say that the current actual fertility rate is 1.8, which is recognized by the Family Planning Commission. It is said that under the current policy fertility rate of 1.38, the actual fertility rate has reached 1.8. This shows that quite a few people are super-born. In other words, a considerable number of people have to have more children to reach the optimal fertility rate of 1.8. I think, is it possible to implement an unequal birth policy just because someone is super-born? Can the fertility of some people be sacrificed to meet the wishes of others to achieve the so-called optimal fertility rate?

According to the census in 2000 and the speculation of many population experts, the current actual fertility rate is about 1.5. Now, if the second child is released and the third child is strictly controlled, the total fertility rate is about 1.8, which can achieve the best fertility goal.

Regarding the liberalization of the second child, the Family Planning Commission is worried that the fertility rate will rebound and the population growth will be difficult to control. In fact, if the second child is released, the family planning work will be much better, and the family planning commission can concentrate on controlling the situation of the third child, and the effect of controlling the birth of more than three children will be much better. Unlike now, because there are a certain proportion of triplets and above, we have to balance the total fertility rate by controlling some people to have only one child, letting some people oppress others and artificially creating unequal reproductive rights.

If the second child is released and the third child is strictly controlled, the fertility rate will not be greatly improved, but will only be closer to the optimal fertility rate 1.8. What are the benefits of letting go of the second child?

1. Relieve the serious imbalance between male and female newborns. It is the wish of most families to have a son and a daughter. However, under the restriction of the only child, many people can only choose boys. The one-child policy has made boys like girls more and become boys.

2. It is conducive to improving the overall quality of the population. The quality of the only child is a big problem that puzzles the family and the country. The unequal reproductive rights between urban and rural areas have led to the negative elimination of population quality. In some places, people abuse multiple pregnancy hormone drugs in order to avoid multiple pregnancy fines, which has caused many adverse consequences to babies.

3. Reduce the risk of one-child families. The existence of a large number of risky families does not depend on the state.

4. Alleviate the problem of aging in China, create conditions for socialized pension, maintain the stamina of economic development, and maintain the comprehensive competitiveness of the country. The aging of developed countries can be alleviated by introducing immigrants. Does China rely on the introduction of immigrants after its aging? There will be tens of millions of bachelors in China in the future, which will force the country to release foreign female immigrants to solve the problem. I hope we don't go so far as to introduce a large number of immigrants, otherwise the family planning policy will be too clever to be mistaken. I believe this is not the original intention of family planning, but the birth policy should be prepared for a rainy day. If you wait until the problem breaks out and passively let go of fertility, it will be difficult to clean up. It takes nearly 20 years for a person to find a job, and he is far from thirsty.

5. National defense needs. There is an old saying that "the only child is not a soldier". The fighting will of the only-child army will be influenced by individuals and families, and it will be weak. In a society where people get old before they get rich, the will and determination to fight will be weak. China's values are different from those of big countries, and China has many internal and external troubles. We must maintain a strong sense of prevention and the will to prepare for war for a long time. Moreover, before going to war, any country should make great preparations for population and encourage childbearing.

6. It is conducive to quelling public grievances arising from family planning law enforcement, easing the relationship between cadres and the masses, building harmony between the family and the country, and achieving a win-win situation for the family and the country.

7. It is conducive to safeguarding the equal legal dignity of all people, reducing corruption and unfairness in the examination and approval of the second child index, and avoiding the loss of honest people.

8. Reducing the negative views of the international community on China's family planning work is conducive to safeguarding human rights, returning to humanity and humanitarianism, and promoting China's values.

9. Letting go of the second child can free the family planning department to provide fertility services, help rural families with pure women, control the rate of defective babies and improve the quality of the population.

Letting go of the second child can start now, and you don't have to wait until the sixth census. Policymakers should be ambitious and resolutely return the right to have a second child to the people. After all, it is not mandatory to let go of the second child, and the population will not rebound. Now that the second child is released, it can also avoid the utilitarian investigation and statistics of population data by family planning system personnel in the sixth population census, so as to obtain accurate population data. After the sixth population census, the state will discuss and decide whether to fully liberalize fertility.

Since the collection of social support fees, grass-roots departments have taken these fees as their source of income. In order to obtain more social support fees, there is a phenomenon of disguised laissez-faire. Instead of this, it is better to let the whole people have a second child.

The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation is not the rejuvenation under the shrinking population. China has a large population, because China has a long history and Chinese civilization has a long history, but China has a low population density, which is less than that of most developed countries. Developed countries developed not because of small population, but because of early development, which is a historical reason. Now developed countries are actively introducing immigrants, and the aging of China will make no one in China emigrate. The immigrant population in the world will be monopolized by India and other populous countries, which is not conducive to the spread of Chinese culture and values, nor to safeguarding the interests of the Chinese nation overseas.

As for how many people China can support, according to international standards, 0.8 mu of arable land per capita can achieve food self-sufficiency, and China's per capita 1.4 mu is still far from the bottom line. Therefore, China is now seriously abandoning grain, it is difficult to sell grain, and the grain price is low. In addition, China's current resource consumption per unit GDP (including water resources) is several times or even ten times that of developed countries, and there is still a lot of room for increasing income and reducing expenditure. Only by changing the extensive production and lifestyle can we feed more people.

The world population is moving towards10 billion. There is no need for China to forcibly reduce its population, but it can keep its population unchanged, so that the proportion of China's population in the world population will continue to decline. But this can maintain the ethical culture of the Chinese nation and prevent the Chinese nation from damaging its roots, thus losing its ability of sustainable development.

Rural people say that now we can have a large number of children, primary and junior high schools don't need money, and high schools and universities have donations from urban people, because urban people can only raise one child. They have a lot of money and have no place to use it, so they only donate it to us. In the future, the descendants of urban people will gradually decrease or even have no children, so we rural people need to supplement them.