Israel's Mossad Account Posted Something Interesting About Iran's New Leader
Stelter Hung Out to Dry a Second Time This week – Says Network...
Progressive Crackpots Vs. Environmental Wackos
The Morality of Taxation
Healthcare Is Not a Right, Nor Should the Government Guarantee It
The Road to Tehran Runs Through Baku
The Parent-Led Rebellion Against EdTech
It’s Time to Build America With U.S.-Made Materials
DEI Is Dead. Corporate America Just Hasn’t Admitted It Yet.
Affordability Is Not a Slogan. Democrats Treat It Like One.
From Panic to Therapy: Cycle of Faux Climate Fear
President Donald J. Trump Can Index Capital Gains With Pen
The Unbearable Lightness of Being Gavin Newsom
The First Time in My Life That I Have Come Into Conflict With...
Temple Israel Terrorist Died of Self-Inflicted Wound, Stuffed Truck With Accelerant and Fi...
Tipsheet

Behold: The Most Tone-Deaf Analysis of China's One-Child Policy

Behold: The Most Tone-Deaf Analysis of China's One-Child Policy

Yesterday, China amended its one-child policy to a two-child policy. While some human rights activists applauded the move, others reminded people that any policy that limits or restricts births is not a good policy.

Advertisement

And then there's CNBC's Carl Quintanilla, who tweeted this:

Which is just...wrong, on so many levels.

China's one-child policy did "successfully" reduce the birth rate of Chinese citizens, but at devastating societal costs. China now has one of the largest gender imbalances in the world, and there are millions of "missing" women who were either forcibly aborted, killed at birth, or abandoned as a result of the policy. It's been dubbed the world's worst law.

When Twitter users, including my colleague Guy Benson, called out Quintanilla for his rather harsh phrasing, he had this defense:

For the record: tweeting a picture of a graph, and then tweeting "it worked" from your own personal account is not a "retweet."

It's important to recognize the horrors the one-child policy has wrought upon China--as they've far outweighed any "benefits" from a shrinking population. It may have "worked," but at what cost?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement