The latest numbers on Japanese population make for a dismal reading — the number of people who died in 2022 (1.56 million) was roughly twice as big as the number of newborn children (771,000). Based on residency registrations, the country’s Internal Ministry estimates a total population loss of some 800,000 last year. This is the largest total drop in population since comparable statistics were first collated in 1968.
Japan now has 122.4 million nationals, down from a peak of over 128 million some 15 years ago.
But the issue of Japan’s shrinking population goes much further into the past. Since the 1990s, successive Japanese governments have been aware that the population would start to decline and tried to offer solutions. And yet, the speed of the contraction has caught even the experts by surprise. In 2017, for example, the Tokyo-based National Institute of Population and Social Security Research forecast that the annual number of births would not fall below the 800,000 threshold until 2030.
With the news on Japan’s population decline growing ever more grim, the government of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has announced a series of efforts to encourage more people to have children.
Japan ‘on the brink’
In January, Kishida warned that the nation is “on the brink” of a crisis and that his government would spend around 20 trillion yen (around €128 billion, $140 billion) on measures to support young couples who wish to have more children. This corresponds to around 4% of Japan’s GDP, and is nearly double the amount that the government had earmarked for the same goal in fiscal 2021.
The prime minister also set up a panel to devise ways to spend the extra funds. He also hosted an event in Tokyo in late July to mark the launch of a nationwide campaign to support children and families. The government has agreed on increasing child allowances and putting in additional effort to eradicate child poverty and abuse. New fathers will also be encouraged to take paternity leave and additional funding will go into pre-school facilities so that working parents are able to return to work. Parents will also get greater tax breaks.
Kishida said he aims to win the support of society for children and parents.
“We hope that a social circle friendly to child-rearing will spread nationwide,” he said at the launch event.
Critics, however, are not entirely convinced by the latest proposals. They warn that the previous government had also tried to use spending to encourage a baby boom, but Japanese society has failed to respond.
The population is rapidly aging, and the number of people over 65 is already at close to 30% in Japan. Japan’s neighbors China and South Korea are facing similar troubles, and the number of senior citizens is expected to continue climbing in the next three decades.
Will funding be effective?
“The government is focusing very much on the economic aspect and while the budget they are allocating to the problem is very large and it sounds positive, we will have to see whether it can truly be effective,” said Masataka Nakagawa, senior researcher with the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.
Nakagawa agreed that the latest population statistics were worrying, but warned there are other factors that need to be considered, such as the falling number of marriages. People in Japan are typically getting married later in life and opting to have fewer children, primarily a result of financial pressures, he said.
Chisato Kitanaka, an associate professor of sociology at Hiroshima University, said governments have failed to devise effective policies to solve the population problem, despite knowing that a decline was inevitable.
“There have long been a lot of hurdles for young people who want to have children to overcome,” she told DW. Those include financial and educational concerns, she said, but arguably the biggest problem is social attitudes.
“In Japan, having a child means that a couple has to get married,” she said. “Only 2% of children are born out of wedlock in Japan, but other countries take a far more ‘flexible’ approach to the concept of a family.”
“This is what is considered socially acceptable here and that makes raising a child as a single mother difficult because she has to work and earn money, while at the same time she is singled out by society,” she added.
More foreigners in Japan
Kitanaka believes the government should dramatically increase welfare payments to families to help them raise their children and reduce the substantial costs of education, particularly at the tertiary level.
While looking into the population statistics, Japanese officials also found that nearly 3 million foreign residents were living in Japan, up by more than 289,000, or over 10%, from the previous year. The increase puts the number of foreigners in the Asian country at record high.
And yet, many Japanese are unwilling to seriously contemplate large-scale immigration as a way to solve Japan’s population problem and provide a stable supply of workers.
“It is difficult,” Kitanaka admitted. “There are clearly more foreign residents of Japan now but we as a society are not really thinking about it as a long-term issue. And there are many in Japan who are still not ready to accept foreigners. We need to discuss the sort of Japan that we want to live in for the future.”
Maybe if they’d fix their work culture this wouldn’t be as big of an issue.
It really is wild to me that the government isn’t working to put restrictions on working hours. It seems that focusing on the benefits of having children, not focusing on building more marriages seems to be a miss from the government.
You mean like the the “Work Style Reform” laws they passed a few years ago aimed at exactly that?
Did it help?
The old guard refuses to change anything. Nothing will change in that country until the leaders either change or pass on. Culture and Tradition is so important in the business setting that it’s overbearing and fundamentally inhibitive to social progress. The government can’t do anything about unless the businesses change…and they won’t.
That is always my first thought when this topic comes up. Often not just with Japan. It is a problem in many countries.
I’m from Tokyo, so I’m saying this as someone with a direct stake in the matter, but is this really a problem? The Earth is on fire right now, the oceans are literally boiling, it is face-melting hot here. The consequences of the period of unsustainable growth are finally coming to pass. There was a report yesterday saying we’d passed the yearly mark for what the planet can provide, and we’d need 1.7 Earths now to meet everyone’s needs. So maybe naturally reducing the population isn’t such a bad thing.
Governments by and large occupy a mindspace that is “individuals must be subjugated for the needs community”, but not “we must subjugate ourselves for the needs of the planet.”
Well we put them into place
It’s only a problem in the near term as those of us in middle age are going to face increasing taxes and cuts of social programs to support the older folks. I plan on retiring here (Japan). I agree we’re way over-populated here for the resources we have and think it should decline, but it’s going to be rough.
I think more remote work or companies moving out of Tokyo could help things as it would make getting into daycare and such easier for families with kids, but I don’t see that happening.
How is it only a problem in the near future? The birth rate has been declining for a generation and is quite likely to continue doing so. It’s already going to get worse for decades, but what if it can’t be stopped?
It will hit an equilibrium point eventually. I hope sooner rather than later, but time will tell.
It’s really an economic problem more than anything. If money were no object it would certainly make sense to simply reduce the size of villages and cities as population and therefore demand shrinks
You can even see this happening in places like Detroit where they’ve bulldozed blocks of abandoned houses from the hayday as the city population shrunk significantly and may not return to those previous levels for quite some time
The general population decline that Japan is experiencing is something every developed nation will likely experience sometime this century as poorer nations develop and modernize. The United States would be declining at a similar rate if not for how many people immigrate to the US. Canada even more so due to their extremely lenient immigration laws compared to the US.
If money were no object communities could take advantage of this shrinking to replace empty deteriorating single family homes with parks, affordable housing, green space, or community space. Blocks of empty suburbs could be far more easily converted into more sustainable land uses if most of the people who once lived there are gone
Removed by mod
Overall it isn’t a bad thing, but on a societal level it makes life harder for the working population supporting the elderly. From what I’ve read on working culture in Japan it’s hard enough to begin with.
I taught English in Japan (JET) for one year, and at the end I said what a lot of people say: I’d love to visit, but I’m never going to work here again.
The work culture in Japan is fucked. The fact that the amount of time you spend at work, not your actual output, determines how “productive” you are is so fucking stupid. I worked my contract hours and I was seen as lazy. Despite the fact that everything I was asked to do was always done and done well, the fact that I didn’t come in 2 hours early and nap at my desk meant I was lazy. Add onto that the fact that I only got a (generous for Japan) 15 days of nenkyuu (paid days off), which you can’t actually use because what happens if you get sick. Sick leave exists, but does it? Does it really? The one time I tried to use it, I was told “it’d be better for everyone if you didn’t”, and then had to use my nenkyuu anyway.
And that was me working a pretty privileged position! If I was coming from Vietnam to work in a retirement home, I’m sure the working conditions would be far worse with the threat of deportation looming over my head. Immigration is a band aid at best. As soon as immigrants have the opportunity to move somewhere better, they will of course take that.
In contrast, I now live in the Netherlands, which shockingly has some of the least generous child benefits in the EU. And yet, we get about 100€/month from the government in support, plus about 50% the cost of childcare paid for. My wife gets 4 months of maternity leave at full pay (I only get 5 days which is super fucked), with up to 3 years at 60% pay with a guarantee of her job being there when she gets back. We each have 25+ days off a year, which are actually used for days off, if the kid gets sick, we can use sick leave to care for it, and sick leave is unlimited. Also, healthcare for children is 100% paid by the government. And with all of that, we’re barely in a position to be able to consider having children.
I have to agree here. I was reading down this waiting for some sort of address of the work culture but its just not there. If Japan truely believes they can solve their population problem by throwing money at it the country is doomed.
Father parental leave has increased a lot this year though. It’s now 5 weeks instead of 5 days.
You’re talking about the Netherlands? It’s 5 days fully paid.
I can take several months if I want it, but I have to take a 30% pay cut, which we can’t afford. Paternity leave in the Netherlands sucks.
In Switzerland, until very recently it used to be 2 days of paternal leave. Basically, go to the hospital, catch up on some sleep, and get back to work men!
Now they extend it to a “very generous” 2 weeks!
Still, it used to be 2 days paid and that’s it. So, it still sucks, but has gotten much better.
I wouldn’t call 3 extra days “much better”.
Well it’s now 5 days 100% and 5 weeks 70% instead of 2 days 100%. I call that much better.
the fact that I didn’t come in 2 hours early and nap at my desk meant I was lazy.
I’m curious, if you were in the office but obviously doing not-work activities like playing video games or table-top games with coworkers instead of napping would that be seen negatively?
For Japan, you could encourage growth in the economy again, and encourage population growth by simply requiring companies to give ample vacation time, and require people to use said vacation time.
It’s fucking ridiculous how much time Japanese people are forced to work. They basically spend the entire day at the office, sometimes the entire night with staff because companies force staff into not mandatory but totally mandatory afterwork drinking parties, and by the time people get back to their tiny homes and apartments, they might get a Sunday off to sleep off the exhaustion, then it’s back into the office.
Many Japanese youth never even see their father, meanwhile they themselves are relentlessly robbed of their time by schools, after school clubs, cram schools, English Schools, test prep, and stupid amounts of homework they’re expected to finish on top of that. Many of my students are on summer holiday, but are just as busy as school time thanks to all the homework they’re saddled with and the clubs and jukus certainly don’t let up for summer.
Nobody respects other people’s free time here, thus people don’t have the energy to do anything outside of their daily cycle, let alone fuck. Why buy a game console, TV, or a nice car when you never have time to enjoy it. Why go to Okinawa, or Fukuoka or Hokkaido when you’re only going to have 3 days tops to enjoy it, and if you do somehow get a week to blow, why not take the dream trip to Hawaii, and spend your money out of the country.
Japanese population and economic troubles ultimately cycle back to the end of free time that the miracle period encouraged, and the bubble economy drove into overdrive. They have tried everything but taken this issue seriously, and the only thing they’ve come close to resembling addressing this is creating more national holidays, which are always way off from any vacation period, and many companies try to get out of giving time off, ands those that can’t expect workers to make all the time up the day after.
They are literally working themselves to death here.
I’m from Tokyo and have been working 20+ years, the idea that all Japanese work themselves to death is meme nowadays. Yes, it was like that before, and there are still a few companies like that now, but it’s not representative of the whole anymore. We do get vacations. There are 16 public holidays a year, 10 vacation days required by law with an extra day for each year of service at the company, and the government will fine companies that don’t force their employees to use at least half of them every year.
“Overtime” is also a bit of a joke. The average salaryman does probably 2 hours real work every day. The rest is just trying to look busy while dicking around on facebook. And attitudes about that are slowly changing too. I rarely see anyone younger than 35 hang around the office late to look busy anymore, they know there’s no point because it’s not going to get you a raise or a promotion anyways.
I’m also in Tokyo and happy to say that I’ve seen the culture of overtime work changing even over the last 5 years. Young people don’t want to do it. Companies that don’t allow it are more loved by the people https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-12/itochu-overtime-ban-offers-solutions-for-japan-birthrate-decline
And there’s also the rise of remote/hybrid/flex work that many people don’t want to go back from
Japan is changing and I’m very optimistic about its future!
Is it now acceptable to leave the office on time and not join the after work nomikai?
What after work nomikai? The few companies that were still doing that stopped after covid.
Ha, yeah, Japan working yourselves to death ……. With more holidays and higher minimum vacation ion than US
16 holidays and 10 vacation days a year and spending all your time at the office dicking about on Facebook is not even close to the same as “a reasonable amount of personal time”. Fuck the Japanese work culture, and reform for real. Read what AgentGoldfish said below for better context.
Mate, please, he taught English here for 1 year. I’ve been in engineering, marketing, and finance roles for over 20. So I’ve got a pretty good feel for what it’s like here and don’t need any additional “context”. Do I think we should get more time off? Yes. But go take a look at what Americans get and how much OT they work and then tell me Japanese work culture is so bad. I’ll give you a hint, they get fuck all and average more OT hours than us (9 hours weekly compared to 6 in Japan). And have you ever heard of 996? That’s literal slavery in China. Could Japan do better? Sure, but it’s not the 80s anymore for christ sake, it’s different here now.
Dude. I never said American work culture isn’t garbage. But let’s not be idiots and say that makes it so we can’t criticize Japan’s. Not to mention how much worse Japan’s is, and the fact that Americans at least are trying to resist this nonsense and fight back.
What good could possibly come from unlimited population growth?
From 1973 to 2023 the world population doubled. If that trend continues, doubling every 50 years, by the year 2123 there will be 32 Billion people on Earth.
We can’t even house and feed the 8 billion we have now, not to mention the ecological damage that would be inevitable due to expansion and urbanization.
Even if we just double the current population to 16 billion people 100 years from now it won’t be sustainable. We need to find a new system that isn’t reliant on the next generation being bigger than the previous generation because we’re less than a century from it collapsing anyway. We have finite space on this planet and infinite growth will fill that up very quickly.The main problem in Japan is the birth rate basically doesn’t even replenish the outgoing population. Japan also have one of the longest life expectancy. Tell me how can you take care of 10 seniors in a retirement home if there’s only 1 working age person to take care of them?
Robots!
Half the people are hand-wringing about robots taking all the jobs. The other half are hand-wringing about population decline leaving too few working-age people to do all the jobs.
Seems like these 2 problems cancel each other out.😎
That’s because you are ignoring how these retirees financial needs are met. Things like social security systems require people paying in. Robots aren’t going to make up the shortfall in tax revenue.
The easiest way is to make sure it’s not a 10:1 ratio to begin with. And, You don’t need 1 nurse per person, if you give a nurse 2 patients for the day for a 2:1 ratio it’s better care than most people get right now.
“The easiest solution is to simply not have a problem”
Wow thanks.
We can house and feed everyone, but we don’t because it is not profitable to do so. Destroying the planet by selling and using fossil fuels makes a lot more money.
If I offered you a home but it was in rural Minnesota with no services or people around for miles would you want to live there?
We can house everyone but not everyone is going to want to live where we have space for them.
Well, a lot of people would rather live somewhere other than where they live. Most people might not want to live in the middle of nowhere, but if the house were available, there would be some people who want it.
The issue is most of the available housing is in places that do not have jobs
I won’t, but maybe a homeless person will take every opportunity they can to get out of the cold streets, you know?
What if the place where you can be relocated to has no job opportunities?
Removed by mod
Let’s start worrying when the global population is actually shrinking then. Not that I would worry, however, as the world was seemingly just fine in 1950 with 2.5 billion.
Things like social security/national pension plans require a steady stream of workers paying taxes into the system so retirees can take money out of it. When you get to the point where more people are retired than the workers can support you have serious issues. Thus the issue is maintaining this population not necessarily growing it.
true, but only if you examine it within the lens of current predatory capitalism. We could all live prosperous lives without worrying about “retirees” if we had an equitable system.
No this exists regardless of your economic philosophy. You need more stuff being contributed than taken no matter what philosophy you follow.
Break it down to the simplest analogy of human survival.
Let’s say you have a tribe of 20 people. 6 are children, 8 are adults who hunt/gather and 6 are elders who stay in the village. The 8 productive ones feed all 20 equally.
If that tribe loses 2 people, regardless of which demographic, the amount of productivity may go down, but so does the need to be productive.
If the tribe loses 2 of the productive adults or the demographics shift so that the adults have to take care of more children or elders, it can be a bit harder of the tribe, but ultimately not if everybody is sharing the resources.
The reason it gets harder in our world is that we don’t share. So when populations change the burden continues to fall only on the exploited class of workers and not on the people hoarding the wealth.
So in the tribal analogy, 1 of the 20 people would take 90% of the productive value of the tribe, regardless of the circumstances, so when the tribe loses some members the 1 person doesn’t suffer because he’s insulated himself completely with his wealth.
The problem with your analogy is it presumes that losing 10% of whatever resource it is you are discussing does not have life altering consequences. Losing those two productive adults would be horrific if everyone was just getting by with all adults working at full capacity.
It’s further complicated by the fact that someone will not always die at the same time as someone stops working. It is possible that fewer workers will need to support more people which again is hard if everyone is just getting by in the initial setup.
Finally it’s made more difficult if the numbers are different such as 12 elderly 6 adults and two kids. The moment someone drops out of the workforce the productivity takes a huge hit.
In every instance a greater number of workers fixes the issue. It is a problem of numbers not distribution.
That sounds like a pyramid scheme.
Then you are confused as to how pyramid schemes work.
Why do these people always want to promote unlimited growth? Oh wait, higher profits
The problem with Japan right now is that it’s in and heading toward decline. They can’t even sustain. Wage are low, price are high. They seriously need to relax on the immigration policy.
Yep, with 0.8 birth rate there’s no way to sustain the population. IIRC you need to have a birth rate of 2.1 to maintain the population.
0.8 population growth is what the earth needs. It isn’t what bankers want so it isn’t what we will get.
It has nothing to do with banking or bankers at all. In a communist system you still need a greater amount of resources being paid into the support systems than being taken from them. If every worker only created enough to cover the needs of themselves and family there would not be enough fir those that could not work and have no family. This is a real world problem that exists regardless of your system for distributing resources
It seems stupid to be concerned with maintaining growth given the abysmal outlook of the sustainability of human society if it continues on it’s current course.
But social/medical security for the elderly is also funded by workers, so I can see why population decline warrants concern.
It just seems to me that we should be focusing on things like automation and healthcare to actually solve the problem rather than trying to brute force it by increasing population everywhere. That’s just not sustainable in the long term, for us nor the planet. But I am not an expert on this subject
Hospitals need workers too.
I don’t think anyone here is proposing continued growth. We’re concerned about not maintaining current society. We’re concerned about rapid (relatively) drops in population in places like Japan
If by “we” you mean people on Lemmy, then perhaps. If by “we” you mean human society then there is definitely a financial reliance on the idea of yearly GDP and company growth sheerly through population growth and corresponding efforts to maintain those growth levels.
We need to be careful to balance avoiding population decline with unchecked growth because there are definitely powerful entities that have a vested interest in promoting the latter with little regard for the consequences.
Because economics, and more specifically fractional reserve banking, require continuous growth. Without growth the whole system comes crashing down. So politics have the option to reform the financial system from the ground up but bankers have historically a tendency to assassinate those that try this, or to force the country into more growth. So they go for the second option.
You are confused this has nothing to do with fractional reserve lending.
You need a greater number of people paying into a pension system than taking out. As Japan has the oldest average population and a smaller number of people attempting to support that elder population they either need to increase the number of workers, decrease the payments to the point of making it almost impossible to retire or destroy the entire nation’s economy by doing nothing.
Their problem isn’t that a bank can create fiat money by lending $10 twice, rather it is because of population decline
Japans attitude to foreigners who decide to try and live there isn’t helping this problem either.
Immigration isn’t a fix. It’s a permanent fix to a temporary problem
What are you trying to say here? It is or is not a fix?
Yes.
Its a bad fix that will cause more problems in the long run.
Why is that, because you think multiculturalism is bad?
Removed by mod
For Japan? Yes.
I have so many questions to ask you…
deleted by creator
Shoot.
A lot can be done, but their culture and traditions simply won’t allow it.
They seem to rather die off as a nation rather than alter their thinking. It’s sad to see, but at the same time that stubbornness to change is the most Japanese thing ever. Their culture revolves around tradition and they rather keep those traditions than open their country up to fresh, new ideas and people.
I kinda wonder if AI takes over the job market and they get universal basic income if we would see a shift back to an increasing population.
This would be almost like it’s out of an Asimov novel.
Not to much. For people living in places lo Tokyo space is also a factor
Stubbornness to change? Did you notice what happened from 1945 onwards?
Removed by mod
It’s not a problem. The system requireing growth is the problem
No it’s people not wanting to work until they die that is the problem. Maintaining that support requires more people paying into it than taking from it. Once you have more taking than paying the system goes bankrupt.
Ya we should all be aspiring to stop growing the population, the real issue is no one seems to be looking for solutions to making smaller populations work rather than trying to stop the decline.
Endless growth is not possible within a finite system. Population dips are inevitable and should be celebrated and accounted for.
Japan being a super racist country will now lead to their old ones rotting away without any care or help, and their social security system falling apart for the rest.
Apart from that a decreasing population is 100% positive for the planet. Especially in the case of such a wasteful and polluting country per capita like Japan.
Source on the last point?
I’m not the person you are responding to, and in general I don’t agree with their post, but there are some rather strange practices in Japan which are absolutely wasteful.
Years back I used to work in the tradeshow industry. Think CES, FABTECH, SEMA and a ton of smaller industry shows. There are tradeshows all over the world but Japan was different. Japan has a “build and burn” policy. Most booths are designed to come apart, get stored in the off season in a warehouse, and are typically used many of times. They’d be used for a few years and then reskinned to cha ge their look and keep them fresh.
That’s not what would happen in Japan. After every show, they would burn the booths for that show. Every. Single. Show. It was wildly inefficient. Some of these shows are massive - a little mini city put up a few weeks prior to an event, then the event runs for about a week, and then in Japan they’d take all those booths and just burn them. It’s wild and I can’t imagine the environmental impact of doing that after every show.
Now this was years back, so things might be different, but with how slow Japan is to change, I’d be surprised if that is the case.
I think similar with their houses. While most houses in the US can last up to hundred years. It is common in Japan for houses to depreciate to worthless in a matter of a decade. So it’s common there to buy old house, demolish, and rebuild from scratch. Repeat after every 10 to 20 years.
What I’ve read on forums is that culturally they don’t keep close ties to buildings and see old buildings as just old & obsolete buildings, so the structures are considered disposable.
This was also largely the case in America until around the time of the second world war and current historic preservation laws gained popularity after Penn Station in New York was demolished
Excellent example. They also are incredibly backwards when it comes to basic technology. Like they seem to love endless paperwork and still use fax machines. It’s such a weird dichotomy where they have such advanced tech such as robots, but still are stuck in the 80s for other things.
To be fair, that’s the US too. Just not the exact same things. Can’t speak for other countries.
EVERY country has its idiosyncrasies but the bizarre cross between super old fashioned and bleeding edge is very much a Japanese thing. In the US a lot of that stuff wouldn’t fly simply because we just don’t really follow tradition. We don’t usually give a shit about how things were done back-in-the-day. We aren’t a particularly history focused country - for better or worse. In this case, very much for the better, for other things not so much.
I getcha and I agree. I’m being pretty vague and talking about different nuances. ^^
Fax machines?? Seriously? Do they use them so they look busy sending off faxes or something? So bizarre.
Looking busy seems to be a common theme from the many videos I’ve seen of Japanese work environment.
Jeez, that’s interesting!
That sure was an interesting industry to work in. Nothing quite like it, quite honestly. Learned a bunch of crazy shit like the “build and burn” stuff and a whole lot more shady business stuff as well. Don’t think it will ever recover in our post-COVID world though. Those days are long done now.
Not the one you asked. I don’t have any statistics, but from what I’ve seen of YouTubers living or visiting Japan is an obscene amount of plastic on the food wrapping/packaging. You open a cardboard box and then there’s a plastic bag inside with small individual portions wrapped in plastic for instance.
While being an environment issue, the plastic wrappings have a practical purpose: protect food from roaches. In many japanese cities you cannot have food open without attracting gokiburi within a few hours. This is also why the japanese keep everything as clean as possible. Even in the shadiest places there is someone with a vaccuum and a stickytape floor roller(!) to prevent the smallest crumb from staying on the floor too long. Eating on the move in the streets is frowned upon, because fallen down crumbs attract roaches. Public trashcans are rare, because - you guessed it - roaches. You are expected to carry any trash back home and put it in a sealed bag in your trashbin. The typical size of japanese houses and flats does not offer much space for storing large food containers, so you buy your food in small portions.
Of course a more environment-friendly wrapping would be better, but it has to be able to withstand a roach nibbling on it, which is not the case for various organic-based polymers.
Climate change and global warming. Less people = less warming.
The feedback loop is already positive so no the warming will only keep incrementing. For what you say to happen the whole world population should be decimated to about 8 million people over a night. And it better be in a miraculous way, because if not, with the rotting bodies we will get disease levels that will make the black death a cakewalk.
The feedback loop is positive? I’ve not read that anywhere, are you sure? There’s a number of tipping points, some which we may have passed already but I don’t think there are any beyond the ability of mankind to counter by simply reducing emissions. Seeing as we’re the greatest contributor to greenhouse gases by a mile.
Hope you’re first to go! 🤞
Says the person wishing someone would die lmao
Get a grip
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Sad to see nazis finding their way to Lemmy, it was so nice without you.
Removed by mod
Already took them, but thanks. Now go back to Truth Social or Twitter.
Super racist with the lowest crime and safest streets
Nah no correlation, let’s continue to flee blue states for no reason
It’s too expensive to have a kid in Japan. There aren’t enough childcare to take care of the kids so one parent usually ends up staying home, making household income low.
Japan can’t fix this by having bandage solutions like paying couples to have children, or subsidizing deliveries or schools. Yes, they help, but only in the short term. Prospective parents will think about long term prospects and opportunity cost in having kids. Japan has change the whole system to make it work for couples to have kids.
Can’t force people to have kids. When the environment simply can’t support a population, it stops growing. It’s in basic biology. People can’t afford it anymore, we’re at a limit.
We’re not at any such limit. Sure overall there may be too many people, and there are certainly regions overcrowded well past sustainability. However we’re talking about developed countries, who do have resources.
Most importantly, this is not about population growth. This is about population implosion, shrinking fast enough to be a problem for their society, and all anyone is advocating gfor is a way to stabilize
Removed by mod
People aren’t always clear; and even then, everyone makes mistakes. Be cool, fam.
This problem will fix itself once all these geriatric morons die off. That goes for basically all problems in the whole world.
New geriatric morons are created daily.
nice ageism.
Remind me again what age group has more captive wealth? Twenty somethings or the elderly? Who is banned from public office? Twenty somethings or the elderly?
Give me a fucking break.
There are sadly plenty of people who are both old and poor.
Your real issue is with capitalism, not the elderly.
Could you tell me the age range that controls the gears of capital and governance?
This is like saying all Americans are the problem because the average wealth is high compared to the rest of the world when you count all the insanely rich assholes in the US in that average.
Again, I thought it was the youth that didn’t vote?
I don’t know who you’re responding to, but it couldn’t be me since I said nothing of the sort. You’d do well not to paint with such broad brushstrokes.
Babies.
Kill them all.
Are you looking forward to the day when you’re elderly and future generations blame you for events you lived through but didn’t personally cause?
I thought the youth were the ones who didn’t vote?
If you’re not giving up luxuries and comfort to prevent it, then you are complicit.
Bullshit, people are not just measured by their suffering, nor is life uni-dimensional.
What are you even trying to say?
If the luxuries are causing the harm, and you keep taking them, then you are complicit. End of story. Stop trying to pretend it was some kother teresa bullshit or justify your killing of current and future generations by saying life is “not dimensional”.
I really wish the lemmy feature to see the conversation thread worked, so I could reply to this. Somehow I’m logged in enough to reply directly but trying to see the thread fails saying I’m not logged in
Oh? What luxuries and comforts are you giving up for the sake of future generations? It’s presumptive of you to assume future scapegoating enthusiasts will care enough to carve out an exception for you when they blame huge groups of people collectively for the problems of tomorrow.
What luxuries and comforts are you giving up for the sake of future generations
Red meat, dairy, most other animal products, driving, cheap electricity, a large house, 24/7 climate control, and cheap new clothes. Cheap imported food. Bought-new electronics. Higher paying jobs I am qualified for, higher paid jobs that require a car for no reason. Not having my face in a facial recognition database my local police makes of people recorded at protests which is used to screen public servant applications (in spite of nothing illegal happening). Just to name the most significant that immediately come to mind.
I also still own my culpability for not doing more rather than narcissistically trying to deflect blame.
Your turn, asshole.
I appreciate that you walk your talk, asshole, (since that’s what we’re evidently calling each other now.) Now if only you could do it without being so abrasive. I doubt future generations will look at our time in history books and say, “those jerks in the early 2000’s ruined the planet, but @schroedingershat was cool.” You will likely be lumped in with everyone else, just like is being done to previous generations in this thread.
I also avoid driving, flying, don’t use climate control, minimize my waste, and use far fewer resources than average, but I also don’t assume everyone in generations older than the one I’m part of are to blame for the ills of the world. Regardless of what groups they were born into, one should judge individuals by their own merits. Otherwise, you’ll be lumping huge amounts of people together inappropriately and showering blame on them because of when they were born, without regard for the individual choices they made.
I’ll say it again. Pay people to have kids. A lot. Include healthcare. It’s stupidly expensive to raise a kid in a developed nation and if you want to raise the birthrate you’re gonna have to offset the costs. Especially since we live in a capitalist hell where must people live paycheck-to-paycheck.
Or just you know improve living conditions and people will naturally want to have kids
Many people will not have kids if that significantly effects their career prospects. Because why would you do that? I’ve seen with my borthers wives what it meant for them to have children and it was basically the end of their careers, no matter how hard they tried.
Right, there will always be a subset who don’t want kids but there are plenty of people that I personally and no personally know of that have tried for years to have kids, that’s not for lack of interest! (I guess it’s pretty easy to perform tho haha)
it was basically the end of their careers, no matter how hard they tried
I’m not sure there’s any way to change that for many professions - I could afford to take a few years off, but if I did then I would be a software developer who hasn’t worked for years in a field that advances rapidly every year. I’m sure I would be able to find a job of some sort, but it wouldn’t be as interesting, prestigious, or well-paid as what I had before.
All stats say the opposite. Birth rates decline as wealth of a country goes up.
No. Birth rates decline as people stop being able to afford to live— and food is the biggest factor. There is a big difference between “a nation’s wealth” and “the wealth of the people”.
Why not both tho
so we get professional breeder families?
why not? economy of scale or whatever
