English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

outline whether they are only for rural families or it applies to urban families. Be specific and I want evidence. And no, it's not homework. You will be credited for your answer if you r best answer on Australian Radio Network - tripple j. soooo???

2007-11-10 14:12:51 · 3 answers · asked by Arun 1 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

3 answers

I actually agree with China's one child policy and wish we had it here. Americans don't know the truth behind it and prefer to judge in ignorance.

First, most would agree that if you are very poor, having children should be a responsible decision. Our society doesn't do that... if you are poor, you can have more and more and more children.

China's one child policy simply says that under their communist structure they pay for a child's school, healthcare, etc.. BUT if you choose to have more than one childn, that financial cost falls on the family. It makes ppl be responsible for their choices and held accountable.

As a single female with no children, I can't stand the way I have to pay MORE taxes for the damn single parent down the road to pop out 5 kids... I pay MORE for them to go to school than she does.

2007-11-14 14:09:35 · answer #1 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0 0

There is no such thing as not following the rule. Someone is assigned at work to keep track of every woman's periods. If she comes up pregnant and already has a child, she must have an abortion.

My source is a 60 Minutes broadcast that I watched several years ago.

2007-11-10 14:21:59 · answer #2 · answered by Poet G 5 · 1 0

saw a bit of a documentary on the subject here in America. A couple of Chinese speaking and looking US citizens slipped their "guides" and wandered around large Chinese cities with a video camera.

One peasant woman they interviewed had four children. She commented that because she was a peasant there really wasn't anything the government could do to her for defying the "one child" edit. She was already poor, lived hand to mouth. Couldn't be imprisoned since she was feeding her kids and then there'd be no one to do it. As long as she stayed poor and a peasant, she was free.

2007-11-10 14:22:49 · answer #3 · answered by Spock (rhp) 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers