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This discussion has been archived.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.
It's raisins that make Post Raisin Bran so raisiny ...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mmcmonster on Thursday August 27 2015, @04:37PM
This has been studied. The cost of added health care needed to treat smoking-related illnesses far outweigh current taxation levels.
More so when you take into account the effects of second-hand smoke on nonsmokers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 27 2015, @05:17PM
This is correct.
This is not.
That was once true, about sixty years ago. Once workplace bans went in the demonstrable health effects went with it.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Thursday August 27 2015, @05:27PM
The cost of added health care needed to treat smoking-related illnesses far outweigh current taxation levels.
Compared to the added health care costs of not getting smoking-related illnesses and not getting that tax revenue?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by curunir_wolf on Thursday August 27 2015, @10:31PM
This has been studied.
Yes, it has. Unfortunately, the statistics often quoted, especially regarding "second-hand smoke", are really over-inflated. This was done purposefully to demonize smoking (and smokers) and generate public support for authoritarian interventions. Look carefully at how things are tallied, and you will note that the health care and fatality statistics are based on all diseases that smoking can cause or exacerbate - including one of the highest killers, heart disease. That's regardless of whether the person suffering from the illness ever actually smoked, or were around smokers. In these statistics, lung cancers is always counted as smoking-related, even though there are other causes of lung cancer.
You don't really see anyone questioning the statistics because, well, smoking causes so many health issues who cares if it sounds worse than it is, because maybe it will help encourage people to quit (or not start). But you should realize that some amount of the costs you're talking about really won't go away even if everybody stopped smoking today and instantly cured of any damage it caused.
I am a crackpot