新湖畔网（随信APP) | 老家的农村人口流失严重，无法挽回

新湖畔网（随信APP) | 老家的农村人口流失严重，无法挽回
【微信/公众号/视频号/抖音/小红书/快手/bilibili/微博/知乎/今日头条同步报道】

农村一年年眼见越来越人少，越来越冷清。心有不舍，还想着未来十年几十年有没有机会重现热闹，凭借政策扶持或者什么可能的机运，但想了一番发现大概不可能了，除非人类社会整体倒退。

人依附于生产资料。人群依据生产资料均衡分布。农业社会，人依附于土地粮食，人群疏密依照土地产粮自然扩散流动，哪里人多地少就往外流，哪里人少地多就吸引人口，维持大体的均衡。

工业社会，人依附于工业生产的各个环节，人口向工业生产所在地聚集。农村只能凭借其产值比例挽留最后的人口。

工业的各个环节，采矿，加工，研发，金融，天然具有集聚性。集中于资源地，地理优势地，先发优势地，政治文化科研中心地。

老家不可能真正地乡村振兴，那里几乎任何工业都不具有比较优势。残留的旅游业也支撑不了多少人口。

也不能认为乡村没振兴就失败了，空着的土地空间没搞工业就浪费了，损失了gdp了。实际上，这部分gdp的上限是由需求端决定的，生产端放在大城市对全局而言是更有利的。

如果强行让农村留存有远高于其产值比例的人口，那就必须要让这部分人口接受人均生活水平明显低于工业社会的平均水平。这是没有意义的，不符合社会规律的。

那如果全国都拼命生孩子，人口爆炸，农村人口还会按比例增加恢复热闹吗？也不会。人口爆炸，因为工业产能提升不太受土地限制，规模效应继续强化，工农产值比例差距会进一步拉大。

老家农村的原有社会形态，必然随着工业化对原农业产值的碾压，逐渐解体凋亡。

花过水无痕

农业占很大比重的西班牙，内陆近乎无人区；高额补贴、关税等手段进口高门槛、千方百计提高粮食自给率的日本，无人区也不断扩大。

更不用说俄罗斯这种地方，就是现在风光秀丽、农业很发达、田园风光无限的瑞士，在没有金融业、精密制造等高利润行业的时代，饥肠辘辘的瑞士人满欧洲跑着当佣兵才能过活。

土地本身的产能是有限的，还要靠老天爷脸色谋肚皮，丰收了还有“多收了三五斗”这种情况；换句话说，收益有限，经常有归零风险，看市场脸色，不是好投资品种。

美国机械化大农场模式下农地都不断贬值，只有盖茨等大资本本着多元化、全产业链等进行战略投资。

何况国内农地本质不流通，没有资本化，就算有钱的大佬想圈个几千亩地，修个桃花源似的山庄，也都不做到，或至少不能随心所欲。换句话说，无法从资本角度最有效的配置资源。

没有宅基地、没有路子，城里人想落实个独家别墅都难。有个亲戚，一直在城里住，村里的老宅的宅基地各种手续齐全，想把老宅拆了建新房回去养老住，都不允许各种刁难，而且还被告知旧房塌了队里要收回，那种木梁土坯旧房现在找人修都找不到师傅。。。

农村的法制环境、各种奇葩状况，天然是投资者的敌人

Jobless

农村不是人多就振兴了，只有人少才能人均土地多，人均土地多才可能振兴。人多地少，吃饭都成问题，不可能振兴。

赵甲

湖北宜都，农村就是这样，过了初八大部分年轻人又出门打工了。这些年轻人到了三四十岁，在城里没挣到钱，又没在城里买房，还是会回到农村的。

农村除了钱少一点，其他都蛮安逸的。比如现在我就在烤火。

sharpsnake

乡村振兴的提法毫无意义，改善农村人生活水平的主要办法就是把他们变成城市人。我国不需要那么多农民，我老家大部分田已经租给大户种植，机械化的情况下，一个人种100亩没什么压力。这样算一下，18亿亩耕地需要1800万全职农民就够了，再加上一些精细农业和机械化程度不高的地方，5000万农民差不多了。

Skyzh1

城镇化不可逆，农村最后也就是种粮大户，农场模式，剩下的人进入城市做市民，产业工人。

选择大于努力V

生产资料往哪里聚集，哪里就会繁荣，过去最重要的生产资料是土地，因此即使人烟稀少的地方，只要能产粮食，那里就会有人，现在最重要的资料是资本，资本向哪里流动哪里就会繁荣，所以人口会持续向城市流动聚集，无解。

牛五十六

郑州市下辖某县级市，GDP 全国排名也不很落后，但是农村没有了高中，初中稍微有条件的也都到了市里面上学。教育和医疗，教育代表了未来一代，医疗代表了老一代，中间这一代要求有工作有收入。
那么，农村能给予这些吗？
农村有未来吗？
答案就是没有未来

ganggu

很快就会逆的。城市无法容纳那么多就业后。找不到工作，还得交房子，消费高，你自己就回老家了。~

来源：集思录微信号：jisilu8

英文版:

Rural areas are seeing fewer people year by year, becoming increasingly desolate. Some are reluctant to accept this fact, wondering if there will be a chance for liveliness in the future decades through policy support or other means. However, after some consideration, it seems that it may not be possible unless human society as a whole regresses.

People rely on the means of production. Populations are distributed evenly based on the means of production. In agrarian societies, people rely on land and food production, and population density naturally spreads according to the distribution of land and food production. Where there are more people and less land, people move elsewhere, and where there are fewer people and more land, populations are attracted to maintain a general balance.

In an industrial society, people depend on various aspects of industrial production, leading to populations gathering where industrial production is concentrated. Rural areas can only hold on to the remaining population based on their proportion of production value.

The various aspects of industrial production, such as mining, processing, research and development, finance, naturally have a clustering effect. They are concentrated in resource-rich areas, regions with geographical advantages, regions with first-mover advantages, and political, cultural, and research centers.

It is not likely that rural areas can truly experience rural revitalization, as they lack any industries with comparative advantages. The remaining tourism industry also cannot support a significant population.

It is not a failure if rural areas do not revitalize, or if land remains unused for industrial purposes, causing a loss in GDP. In reality, the upper limit of this part of the GDP is determined by the demand side, and positioning the production side in large cities is more advantageous for the overall situation.

If rural areas were to retain a population significantly higher than their production value proportion, these individuals would have to accept a significantly lower standard of living than the average level in industrial society. This is meaningless and goes against the laws of society.

Even if the entire nation were to have a population explosion due to a vigorous birth rate, rural populations would not increase proportionately to restore liveliness. With a population explosion, industrial capacity can increase without being as limited by land, further widening the gap in production value between industry and agriculture.

The original social structure of rural areas, as agriculture's production value is increasingly overshadowed by industrialization, will gradually disintegrate.

Flowers bloom only on water

In Spain, where agriculture has a significant proportion, inland areas are nearly uninhabited; in Japan, where high subsidies and tariffs aim to import high barriers and increase self-sufficiency in cereals by all means, the uninhabited areas continue to expand.

Not to mention places like Russia, and even in Switzerland, a country with beautiful scenery and well-developed agriculture, in the absence of high-profit industries such as finance and precision manufacturing, hungry Swiss people had to work as mercenaries across Europe to make ends meet.

The capacity of land itself is limited, dependent on both nature and good harvest seasons. In other words, the revenue is limited, with the risk of returning to zero frequently, subject to market trends, making it an undesirable investment.

Under the American mechanized large-scale farm model, agricultural land continues to depreciate, with only large capitals like Gates investing strategically in diversification and entire industry chains.

Domestic agricultural land does not circulate naturally, is not capitalized, and even if wealthy individuals want to acquire thousands of acres of land to build a villa akin to a paradise, they would not be able to do so, or at least not freely. In other words, resources cannot be most effectively allocated from a capital perspective.

Without homesteads and access, it is difficult for urban residents to realize their dreams of owning an exclusive villa. For example, I have a relative who has been living in the city, and all the procedures for the homestead of the old house in the village are complete and in order. However, he is not allowed to tear down the old house and build a new one to retire and live there peacefully, let alone have the freedom to do as he pleases. In essence, it is impossible to most effectively allocate resources from a capital perspective.

The legal environment and various unique situations in rural areas naturally act as obstacles for investors.

Jobless

Rural areas cannot thrive simply with a dense population. Only with fewer people can there be more land per capita, which could potentially lead to revitalization. With many people and little land, even food becomes an issue, making revitalization impossible.

Zhao Jia

In Yidu, Hubei Province, rural areas are like this. After the eighth day of the Chinese New Year, most young people leave for work again. These young people, in their thirties or forties, who have not made much money in the city and have not bought a house, will eventually return to the countryside.

Apart from having less money, life in the countryside is quite relaxed. For example, right now, I am sitting by the fire.

Sharpsnake

The concept of rural revitalization is meaningless; the main way to improve the lives of rural people is to turn them into urbanites. China does not need so many farmers. In my hometown, most of the land has been leased to large-scale farmers for cultivation. In a mechanized context, one person can manage a hundred acres without much pressure. Calculating, with 1.8 billion acres of arable land, we only need 18 million full-time farmers, and adding in some areas with refined agriculture and low levels of mechanization, around 50 million farmers would be enough.

Skyzh1

Urbanization is irreversible, and eventually rural areas will become large grain-producing farms. The remaining people will move to cities to become citizens and industrial workers.

Choice is Greater than Effort V

Where means of production gather, prosperity follows. In the past, the most important means of production was land; therefore, even in sparsely populated areas, as long as they could produce food, people would gather there. Now, the most critical resource is capital. Where capital flows, prosperity follows. Therefore, the population will continue to flow and gather in cities, with no solution in sight.

Niu Wushi Liu

In a county-level city under Zhengzhou City, which is not far behind in national GDP ranking, rural areas no longer have high schools, and even the slightly well-off children go to schools in the city. Education represents the future generation, healthcare represents the older generation, and the intermediate generation demands jobs and income.
So, can rural areas provide these? Is there a future in rural areas?
The answer is no future.

Ganggu

Things will soon reverse. Cities cannot accommodate all the employment needed. When you can't find a job and have to pay for housing, expenses are high, you will return to your hometown on your own.~

Source: Collective Thinking Record WeChat: jisilu8

老家农村变冷清，不可逆
#老家农村变冷清不可逆

关注流程：打开随信App→搜索新湖畔网随信号：973641 →订阅即可！

公众号：新湖畔网   抖音：新湖畔网

视频号：新湖畔网   快手：新湖畔网

小红书：新湖畔网   随信：新湖畔网

百家号：新湖畔网   B站：新湖畔网

知乎：新湖畔网 微博：新湖畔网

UC头条:新湖畔网   搜狐号：新湖畔网

趣头条：新湖畔网 虎嗅：新湖畔网

腾讯新闻：新湖畔网   网易号：新湖畔网

36氪：新湖畔网     钛媒体：新湖畔网