They’ll survive it, their markets and investments aren’t overvalued like ours are. They’ll crash, re-evaluate their societal priorities, and start to build again
Yeah, but that’s only a problem if elderly orderlies is an underpaid job that no one wants, and if people can’t afford to live on it when choosing such a profession.
If the economy adjusts or society adjusts such that caring for the elderly is a highly sought out and secure job that can easily pay a mortgage, what’s the issue?
This is what I mean when I say they will crash and their economy will adjust.
There aren’t enough tax payers paying into the system to sustain the end of life care, retirement funds/pensions/social security equivalents that an elderly population that large. when you have a 1:1 ratio of people paying in vs paying out your assistance levels will be extremely weak.
No nation can sustain that large of an elder population. It’s not economically viable.
No, they’re absolutely not. Their GDP will majorly decline, but their QOL will stay the same or even improve and their GDP per capita also won’t see much change.
I’m interested to know how you believe the elderly will be cared for? Let’s assume for a moment they have no issues financially supporting the elderly, but physically who is supposed to care for them? Who will make up the nurses, doctors and caretakers now that their population pyramid looks like a chicken drumstick?
Their nation needs tax revenue. That depends on having people to tax. If the population declines too much they cannot afford to maintain social services and QoL will decline.
None of this is particularly controversial or surprising.
The services’ costs are dependent on the number of recipients. They’re already in the slump of elderly being a drain on the system, it can only get better not worse.
The only concern of the population decline that I can see is the decrease in funding available for Military Expenses.
And, if things get really bad, all they have to do is open up for immigration and able bodied workers will magically appear.
If Generation A has a higher number of people than Generation B then when Generation A dies off there will be a lower number of elderly. It’s a temporary slump. It might last a decade or more, but it is temporary.
According to your source the Percentage of people aged over 65 peaks in 2042 or 2043 at about 38% if the government does nothing, compared to the 29.6% currently.
Right now a lot of skilled workers are fleeing to the EU, so Japan could totally capitalize on that. Or it can just educate its population to be skilled labor and give all the low skilled labor (if that even exists) to immigrants. Immigrants work hard for lower wages and are less prone to crime, there is no good faith argument against that.
The projected population of elderly people is projected to be 40% of the total population within 50 years unless substantial shifts happen. They are not replacing workers fast enough.
Japan has never wanted more immigrants and soon they will need a LOT of immigrants. Japan’s traditional xenophobia might prevent them for getting enough people.
Japan is on the verge if major economic collapse if they do not increase the population
They’ll survive it, their markets and investments aren’t overvalued like ours are. They’ll crash, re-evaluate their societal priorities, and start to build again
That’s an incredibly optimistic outlook.
I mean every society has to rebuild after a crash, I’m just optimistic that they’ll do it faster
You might want to look into the population studies on Japan. They are pretty bleak
Got a summary? I know the onus is on me, but I’m not likely to dig much further
Within 50 years the population will shrink to 70% of current levels with 40ish percent of the total population being elderly.
Within 50 years, the whole world population is going to shrink dramatically, and it will have nothing to do with declining birth rates.
That’s an interesting claim. Where are you getting that idea? Are you suggesting climate change will do this without decreasing birth rates?
Yeah, but that’s only a problem if elderly orderlies is an underpaid job that no one wants, and if people can’t afford to live on it when choosing such a profession.
If the economy adjusts or society adjusts such that caring for the elderly is a highly sought out and secure job that can easily pay a mortgage, what’s the issue?
This is what I mean when I say they will crash and their economy will adjust.
There aren’t enough tax payers paying into the system to sustain the end of life care, retirement funds/pensions/social security equivalents that an elderly population that large. when you have a 1:1 ratio of people paying in vs paying out your assistance levels will be extremely weak.
No nation can sustain that large of an elder population. It’s not economically viable.
No, they’re absolutely not. Their GDP will majorly decline, but their QOL will stay the same or even improve and their GDP per capita also won’t see much change.
Birtherism is bullshit.
I’m interested to know how you believe the elderly will be cared for? Let’s assume for a moment they have no issues financially supporting the elderly, but physically who is supposed to care for them? Who will make up the nurses, doctors and caretakers now that their population pyramid looks like a chicken drumstick?
Their nation needs tax revenue. That depends on having people to tax. If the population declines too much they cannot afford to maintain social services and QoL will decline.
None of this is particularly controversial or surprising.
The services’ costs are dependent on the number of recipients. They’re already in the slump of elderly being a drain on the system, it can only get better not worse.
The only concern of the population decline that I can see is the decrease in funding available for Military Expenses.
And, if things get really bad, all they have to do is open up for immigration and able bodied workers will magically appear.
You are the only person I have seen claiming the elder population of Japan is decreasing or that there is light at the end of the tunnel.
https://www.ipss.go.jp/pp-zenkoku/e/zenkoku_e2023/pp2023e_PressRelease.pdf
Japan might not get the right immigrants at the right time. They shouldn’t count on skilled labor appearing when they need it.
If Generation A has a higher number of people than Generation B then when Generation A dies off there will be a lower number of elderly. It’s a temporary slump. It might last a decade or more, but it is temporary.
According to your source the Percentage of people aged over 65 peaks in 2042 or 2043 at about 38% if the government does nothing, compared to the 29.6% currently.
Right now a lot of skilled workers are fleeing to the EU, so Japan could totally capitalize on that. Or it can just educate its population to be skilled labor and give all the low skilled labor (if that even exists) to immigrants. Immigrants work hard for lower wages and are less prone to crime, there is no good faith argument against that.
The projected population of elderly people is projected to be 40% of the total population within 50 years unless substantial shifts happen. They are not replacing workers fast enough.
Japan has never wanted more immigrants and soon they will need a LOT of immigrants. Japan’s traditional xenophobia might prevent them for getting enough people.
That’d require significant societal change to an environment where having children is actually manageable
Which is why this is a problem