how about we reduce the need for so much international shipping in the first place?
Because China has 1.44 billion consumers and the USA only has 330 million, and companies like Apple in the long run can sell more iPhones in China because there are more people to buy them. The Chinese see Western brands as more desirable and authentic, much like many affluent Americans would prefer a foreign Mercedes to a domestic Cadillac.
Starting pay for Chinese workers assembling iPhones is $3.15 per hour[1].
China does not have as strong of environmental regulations so massive toxic lakes can be produced there extracting rare earths like neodymium[2].
Chinese women have more children than American women because in America we are constantly told the earth is overpopulated and man is destroying the climate, and in America we are told it is medieval for women to focus on being mothers who produce and raise children who ultimately become the workers and consumers that are a nation's true wealth. (The goose that lays golden eggs is more valuable than the golden eggs.) But if a woman enters the workforce today instead of having children her immediate production and consumption can improve this quarter's profits, whereas if she instead has 4 children who won't enter the workforce until two decades in the future, well, that's two decades in the future and here in the West investors won't wait two decades for returns.
So we must increasingly have non-American women give birth to the workers who make and consume Apple products and other Western brands.
Chinese women have more children than American women
The fertility rate of the USA and China is the same - 1.7 children per couple. China's facing a huge demographic crisis in the coming decades, primarily as a result of the one child policy.
It’s not a demographic crisis, but an economic one. China’s citizens will be fine if the economy is appropriately managed (with healthcare and elderly care prioritized over more frivolous spending/investment categories), but China and the CCP will have diminished power with less labor and consumers available. It’s an important distinction.
There's still a short-term dependency ratio crisis brewing. Healthcare and eldercare are very labor-intensive, low-productivity industries; if you "prioritize" them such that all of the old get adequate care, the rest of the economy is going to be severely starved of workers. That's going to cause a standard of living drop that working-age Chinese may or may not be okay with.
Over the long run a lower population usually leads to higher quality of life for each individual, but you've got to get to the long run first.
The fertility rate of the USA and China is the same - 1.7 children per couple. China's facing a huge demographic crisis in the coming decades, primarily as a result of the one child policy.
Is this really true? No wonder America seems more depressing every day. I didn't realize China's fertility rate was so high (thought it would be <1).
Comments
Because China has 1.44 billion consumers and the USA only has 330 million, and companies like Apple in the long run can sell more iPhones in China because there are more people to buy them. The Chinese see Western brands as more desirable and authentic, much like many affluent Americans would prefer a foreign Mercedes to a domestic Cadillac.
Starting pay for Chinese workers assembling iPhones is $3.15 per hour[1].
China does not have as strong of environmental regulations so massive toxic lakes can be produced there extracting rare earths like neodymium[2].
Chinese women have more children than American women because in America we are constantly told the earth is overpopulated and man is destroying the climate, and in America we are told it is medieval for women to focus on being mothers who produce and raise children who ultimately become the workers and consumers that are a nation's true wealth. (The goose that lays golden eggs is more valuable than the golden eggs.) But if a woman enters the workforce today instead of having children her immediate production and consumption can improve this quarter's profits, whereas if she instead has 4 children who won't enter the workforce until two decades in the future, well, that's two decades in the future and here in the West investors won't wait two decades for returns.
So we must increasingly have non-American women give birth to the workers who make and consume Apple products and other Western brands.
[1] https://archive.ph/yemy3
[2] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150402-the-worst-place-...
Not commenting on the rest of your comment, but
The fertility rate of the USA and China is the same - 1.7 children per couple. China's facing a huge demographic crisis in the coming decades, primarily as a result of the one child policy.
It’s not a demographic crisis, but an economic one. China’s citizens will be fine if the economy is appropriately managed (with healthcare and elderly care prioritized over more frivolous spending/investment categories), but China and the CCP will have diminished power with less labor and consumers available. It’s an important distinction.
There's still a short-term dependency ratio crisis brewing. Healthcare and eldercare are very labor-intensive, low-productivity industries; if you "prioritize" them such that all of the old get adequate care, the rest of the economy is going to be severely starved of workers. That's going to cause a standard of living drop that working-age Chinese may or may not be okay with.
Over the long run a lower population usually leads to higher quality of life for each individual, but you've got to get to the long run first.
Population debt can be a useful tool when not abused, but it must be paid back.
I'm not sure what that means but perhaps they aren't mutually exclusive?
If you’re optimizing for GDP, it’s a crisis. If you’re optimizing for quality of life, not necessarily.
Is this really true? No wonder America seems more depressing every day. I didn't realize China's fertility rate was so high (thought it would be <1).