SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
in the long run the fortunes of nations are determined by population trends. Japan is not only the world's fastest-aging major economy (already every fourth person is older than 65, and by 2050 that share will be nearly 40 percent), its population is also declining. Today's 127 million will shrink to 97 million by 2050, and forecasts show shortages of the young labor force needed in construction and health care. Who will maintain Japan's extensive and admirably efficient transportation infrastructures? Who will take care of millions of old people? By 2050 people above the age of 80 will outnumber the children.
Who will take care of millions of old people? Robots!
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Japan Has Aged Out of its Economic Miracle
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 41 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
TAPPING? You POLITICIANS! Don't you realize that the END of the "Wash
Cycle" is a TREASURED MOMENT for most people?!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Daiv on Thursday August 27 2015, @02:33PM
All I see are benefits to the Japanese economy. No need for expansion (so no clamoring for MOAR TAX DOLLAS). Saturation is fairly high now, so less worry of crowding. More opportunities for jobs as they become vacated by retirees, so less stress and competition in schooling.
Is it just that the old people want more young people to pay for them to not work? Hopefully they built up a nice retirement fund, as I have little doubt most have.
Something tells me that there will be a small increase in Japanese population in the next 20 years and a steady increase for years after that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @02:44PM
Putting aside economics for a moment, Japan is jammed pack full of people. Seriously, a lower population has to be more sustainable long term.
And it looks like they are lowering the population without ugly laws, wars, starvation..etc.
All I can say is well done.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday August 27 2015, @06:22PM
The infrastructure and economy is already ugly enough to discourage population increase.
Look at the "helpers" on the commuter train platforms, then realize that these people are economically forced to work and deal with this kind of crowding. That's better birth control than most things I know of.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ikanreed on Thursday August 27 2015, @02:48PM
Workforce is one area where supply side economics is actually relevant. The other being raw materials.
A shrinking workforce, without the reduced demand of a shrinking population, is not a good thing.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tibman on Thursday August 27 2015, @02:53PM
Sounds good for pay though.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:00PM
If you don't take the inflationary component into account.
Things become more expensive as more people need them. Wages inflate, because everyone needs employees to provide services, but at the same time, those wages need to compete with increasingly stretched retirement accounts. The system will find a balance, but it's by no means certain to be a good one for workers.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday August 27 2015, @06:38PM
And that is why Japan has been putting so much effort into robotics. They already have a need for them, and they see an increasing need.
OTOH, there *is* a dark side to this. The reason Japan is so desperate for mechanized workers is that they tend to be Xenophobic. They don't want to invite immigrants. Some Korean families have lived in Japan for hundreds of years and still aren't accepted.
That said, given their desires (and desires are never reasonable, not even yours) they are adopting a reasonable approach. Japan *is* overfull, so cutting the population is necessary. Doing this humanely involves an aging population being supported by a smaller working age population. So...robots. The question is, how far will this trend go?
P.S.: Given Japan's history, their xenophobia is quite reasonable. They have usually been independent, and have been repeatedly attacked by outsiders. (Yeah, more recently in WWII they returned the favor, but that's ONE instance. Japan has a long history of repelling invaders. Sort of like Britain, only more successfully.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Thursday August 27 2015, @10:11PM
Given Japan's history, their xenophobia is quite reasonable. They have usually been independent, and have been repeatedly attacked by outsiders. (Yeah, more recently in WWII they returned the favor, but that's ONE instance. Japan has a long history of repelling invaders. Sort of like Britain, only more successfully.)
Yea, you should probably check again. Japan first invaded Korea in the 16th century, and Korea was actually run as a colony of Japan starting around 1910 (they were a part of the Japanese Empire from some time in the 1850's). So Japan's imperialism goes back much further than you give them credit for.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @11:30PM
Yeah. For the last 700 years, Japan has pretty much always been the aggressor. [wikipedia.org]
-- gewg_
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday August 28 2015, @12:53AM
And Britain invaded France, and ran part of France as, essentially, a colony. (Ever hear of Joan of Arc?) But Britain was invaded by the Norse, the Danes, and Angles, the Romans, The French (though you could claim those were Norse, the one's I mean started out from Normandy).
Nobody's ancestors were peaceful. Only some of them. That goes for countries as well as people. But Japan was more successful at fighting off invasions than Britain was, probably because their "channel" was a lot wider.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.