there is no topic. it's a supplement essay. please be as critical as possible. i promise i won't be offended :)
I have noticed that cars in the right lane tend to move at a steady and even pace. New lanes may be added in the middle, but the right lane is the one constant path that remains the same regardless of nearby conditions. Economics is the same way. It strictly relies on math and logistics. Just as economies cannot operate outside the production possibilities curve, so too China cannot support unrestricted population growth. From an economic perspective, China's One Child Policy is absolutely necessary.
However, economics is insufficient in explaining why I will never be able to have any siblings. It cannot provide my parents another child if I became disabled from an accident. It also cannot guarantee me that someone will spoon pureed vegetables into my mom's mouth or that someone will help my dad put on his flannel shirt at night when he becomes unable to do so by himself in twenty years. Economics simply does not account for this.
On the other hand, public policy tries to accommodate these factors. However, it is essentially a left lane trying to merge right; if no spaces are available or if no cars are willing to let it in, it simply cannot force itself onto the right lane. Eventually, the broken infrastructure can no longer be hidden. Although the One Child Policy has mitigated the food and land burden, it will soon sever all ties in China except for parent-child and grandparent-grandchild. A single child will then become responsible for supporting not only two parents but also four grandparents. Furthermore, with an inadequate social security system, the problem is only worsened. Although public policy may try to correct these problems, economic restraints often prevent any real change.
I have realized that economics and public policy do not form that neat perpendicular intersection found in a driver's ed handbook. Rather, the situation is more like a merge sign, warning the two intersecting lanes.