Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Japan News

Japan's Population Drops by Nearly 800,000 With Falls in Every Prefecture For the First Time (theguardian.com) 175

Every one of Japan's 47 prefectures posted a population drop in 2022, while the total number of Japanese people fell by nearly 800,000. The figures released by the Japan's internal affairs ministry mark two new unwelcome records for a nation sailing into uncharted demographic territory, but on a course many other countries are set to follow. From a report: Japan's prime minister has called the trend a crisis and vowed to tackle the situation. But national policies have so far failed to dent population decline, though concerted efforts by a sprinkling of small towns have had some effect.

Wednesday's new data showed deaths hit a record high of more than 1.56 million while there were just 771,000 births in Japan in 2022, the first time the number of newborns has fallen below 800,000 since records began. Even an all-time high increase in foreign residents of more than 10%, to 2.99 million, couldn't halt a slide in the total population, which has declined for 14 years in a row to 122.42 million in 2022. In January, prime minister Fumio Kishida said that addressing the birthrate was "now or never" and warned, "Our nation is on the cusp of whether it can maintain its societal functions."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Japan's Population Drops by Nearly 800,000 With Falls in Every Prefecture For the First Time

Comments Filter:
  • by rossz ( 67331 ) <ogre@noSpAM.geekbiker.net> on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:23PM (#63729396) Journal

    No one has time to date and are too tired to make bouncy-bouncy.

    • by ickleberry ( 864871 ) <web@pineapple.vg> on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:31PM (#63729432) Homepage
      Maybe its because of technology there isn't enough work. You can order your food online, use a blow up doll for sex, waste away your idle time by exposing your eyeballs to a neverending stream of pixels changing colour. This is all stuff you couldn't do 100 years ago.

      If you lived 100 years ago you would be too busy bringing in the turf, repairing the thatch on the roof, milking your 1 cow that you'd need a wife to cook your dinner and keep the stove lit. Nowadays that wife is happy enough spending her days in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment eating nutella from the jar while watching netflix.
      • by Brain-Fu ( 1274756 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @06:15PM (#63729594) Homepage Journal

        I don't see much evidence for the "not enough work" hypothesis. Japanese culture is infamous for its overtime working culture, after all.

        New tech has brought new luxuries (home television, video games, etc.) but old tech had plenty of old luxuries that people would waste their time on. Blaming the tech itself is something of a thoughtless whats-right-in-front-of-me sort of reaction.

        Human nature has not changed over the past few generations, so if people prefer tech interactions over human interactions, there must be a reason beyond the mere existence of the tech. In fact, there are likely many reasons all interpermeating each other.

        For example, in farming societies, more kids means more work gets done and hence more crop to sell, creating a very high incentive to breed. In todays society, more kids means much higher expenses for the family to pay for, and much less time to do anything fun (tech-related or otherwise). That alone would be enough to explain a severe drop in birth rates.

        There has also been a cultural phenomenon in the developed world in which old religions, traditions, and moral codes are being thrown to the wind. Many elements of these traditional cultural institutions supported family and breeding, and have been replaced with elements that support independent happiness-seeking instead.

        There has been a worldwide divorce revolution, leaving many people questioning the value of even getting married in the first place (not to mention leaving many people hesitating due to fear of the financial consequences that divorce could bring). That revolution is still in full swing, though I don't now how much it applies in japan.

        Feminism has achieved its original goals of female equality in the developed world, and so many women are choosing a career-focused life rather than a child-focused life. That reduces the pool of breeders which will naturally bring birth rates down. It also has altered wages by increasing the labor supply, meaning that for most people, both members of a marriage must work full time in order to make the same income that one working member used to be able to make. So the phenomenon of the stay-at-home-parent is buried under bills that need to be paid, thus further driving people away from breeding.

        And on top of all that.....wealth inequality has most of the middle class and all of the working class simply too poor to breed.

        So, there are a bunch of realistic possibilities. With all these forces working against breeding, it really is no wonder that people would turn to other, more affordable, forms of self-actualization instead....and video games are well within reach.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

          I don't see much evidence for the "not enough work" hypothesis. Japanese culture is infamous for its overtime working culture, after all.

          New tech has brought new luxuries (home television, video games, etc.) but old tech had plenty of old luxuries that people would waste their time on. Blaming the tech itself is something of a thoughtless whats-right-in-front-of-me sort of reaction.

          Human nature has not changed over the past few generations, so if people prefer tech interactions over human interactions, there must be a reason beyond the mere existence of the tech. In fact, there are likely many reasons all interpermeating each other.

          Japan has seen the rise of the Herbivore men, who have largely checked out of society. Japanese women are not interested in them, for relationships, being that work and marriage are intertwined However, the herbivore men are not interested in relationships either.

          Interestingly enough, the herbivore men do not appear to be unhappy at all.

          There has been a worldwide divorce revolution, leaving many people questioning the value of even getting married in the first place (not to mention leaving many people hesitating due to fear of the financial consequences that divorce could bring). That revolution is still in full swing, though I don't now how much it applies in japan.

          Feminism has achieved its original goals of female equality in the developed world, and so many women are choosing a career-focused life rather than a child-focused life.

          Indeed. I'm not certain of the situation in Japan, but Western women were told they could have it all. A high paying career, a meek and pliable husband, and children star

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            In Japan, traditionally the wife is responsible for household finances and making many important decisions. The husband is mostly there to provide income to support her and his children.

            Many young people are rejecting that.

            There are also issues with LGBT rights in Japan, because currently same-sex marriage is not possible. It's hard to say exactly how many people that affects, but it's more than zero.

            • In Japan, traditionally the wife is responsible for household finances and making many important decisions. The husband is mostly there to provide income to support her and his children.

              Many young people are rejecting that.

              Yes, the concept of the man as wallet. Men have sacrificed themselves for their spouse and children for millennia, but after reaping a lot of hatred for that in modern times, they are leaning out. And they are largely happier for it. Yes, it has a certain cost, but the toxicity of modern societies for men makes the traditional standards not worth the pain.

              There are also issues with LGBT rights in Japan, because currently same-sex marriage is not possible. It's hard to say exactly how many people that affects, but it's more than zero.

              Interesting - I'd always assumed they were pretty liberal in that respect, but they aren't.

              Hopefully Western culture can find an adjustment. Aside fro

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Japan's over-work culture is more to do with long hours and stress, than to do with the amount of work available. It used to be taboo to leave work before your boss, so the lowest ranked employees would end up having to wait for everyone from the owner down to go before they could. And then after work there would be mandatory socializing until late, usually at a bar or working men's club.

          Younger people are rejecting that, along with things like needing to wear a suit, and other formalities. Not just work, b

      • I'm in Japan visiting now, and my spouse (Japanese expat) was reading an article that she makes more than the average Japanese salary man working a "leisurely" 35 hours a week now that the cans dollar is worth more than the yen. Even as I type this, the cost of things here in Japan are Canadian prices 10yrs ago, but their salaries are Canada wages 20yrs ago. I'm honestly surprised Japanese workers (especially the young people) aren't up in full open rebellion. It's such a nice country, I hope their incompet
        • Japan has some issues for sure but some countries just have different costs of living and income. The place I live in the average wage is like $20k but costs are similar to most of Western Europe or North America (outside of hotspots like Bay Area, NYC, Vancouver, etc).

          Japan doesn't even have particularly low fertility rates either, at 1.3/woman it's similar to Spain, Italy or Finland. A bit below Germany.

    • It's not just that (Score:2, Insightful)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 )
      What's the point of having the kid you're never going to see because you work too much? Why would you go through all the pain and hassle and headache of having a child just so you can pay somebody else to raise them? It would be one thing if you were raising them to take care of you and your old age but modern jobs pay so little for so many hours your kid isn't going to be able to support themselves much less you.

      The entire social contract is completely broken. It's time for either a new new deal (or wh
      • What's the point of having the kid you're never going to see because you work too much?

        In the old days, the point was to have someone supporting your old days.

        • What's the point of having the kid you're never going to see because you work too much?

          In the old days, the point was to have someone supporting your old days.

          It's an issue now too. A lot of the women in my age group are starting to have physical ailments, and require someone to look after them after they's had their various operations. But most of my age group ladies are divorced, so they have no support structure. And some relatively simple operations end up requiring some weeks in rehab hospitals. Whereas it could have been an outpatient thing if they had a support structure at home.

          Funny thing is, they lament the loss of family connection, which is somethi

      • There's a fix for this - Change in monetary incentive. Tax everyone based on the number of children they have. 0 kids? 75% tax rate. Even if you make minimum wage. 25% tax reduction per child, at which point once you hit 3 you pay 0% for the rest of your life. Watch the population absolutely explode!
      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        It used to be important to have children so that when you got old they could support you. That's not so common in Japan now.

        Some jobs in Japan do still pay enough for one person to support a family, meaning the other parent can be at home full time. But younger people are less interested in those jobs, which tend to quite formal and have long hours. They would rather live the low cost bachelor lifestyle.

        To reverse it the government needs to be serious about reducing the cost of living, and the cost of child

    • Along with industrialization the age to have children has gone up as well.

      The trend is however the same in every advanced society, even in the Nordic countries where vacations and social support are plentiful. They are probably the most children and family-friendly nations on earth, and the birth rates are declining.

      Modern society has changed the reasons why children are made. More opt to do less or none at all, because they can and have that choice. The evolutionary pressure is fading away. One child can s

      • Along with industrialization the age to have children has gone up as well.

        Yup - and now in the US the ladies are having geriatric pregnancies. It is a race in your mid 40's with IVF on frozen eggs. Of course, perimenopause is not uncommon at that age, so for some, it SOL.

    • by korgitser ( 1809018 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:58PM (#63729538)

      While cultural specifics explain why Japan is in the vanguard, low birthrate in itself is nothing special anymore.

      State pensions took away the need to have children to support you in the old age.

      Medicine took away the need to have many children just in case so that at least of them some survive to support you.

      Birth control took away the correlation between sex and reproduction.

      Education gave women ambitions outside the 'kinder, küche, kirche' department.

      The resulting demographic transition has swept through almost all societies in the world, and it will get everyone in the end. No one has figured out a way to turn it back. There is still great inertia here and there, but the writing is on the wall. The global population will hit a peak of 9-10B and it will be downhill from there.

      • by LordofWinterfell ( 90845 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @06:14PM (#63729588)

        Do we want to turn it back? Maybe the way forward is through, we find ways to minimize the disruption of a smaller human imprint.

        • Do we want to turn it back? Maybe the way forward is through, we find ways to minimize the disruption of a smaller human imprint.

          If the demographic distribution across ages were constant, there would be no disruption. The problem is more about the skewing of the age distribution toward older ages, so that fewer working people support more non-working people. That's the problem. The shrinking of the population is just a correlated side effect.

          Part of the problem is total production, which could ostensibly be mitigated by more efficient workers, potentially with the help of machines. However, the other part of the problem is the de

          • by ghoul ( 157158 )
            So tax machines. Or corporations. Increase corporate taxes and impose them on revenue not profit. its no different than taxing labor. Labor is taxed on the entire salary not the savings after all the costs of living are paid so why should corporates be taxed only on the profit not the revenue?
            • Labor is taxed on the entire salary not the savings after all the costs of living are paid

              Actually, it's pretty traditional to exempt what you might consider "basic living expenses" - IE the standard deduction and personal exemption. Though the latter was reduced to $0 until 2025. It wasn't much, but it was something.

              Also, we have taxes that hit all revenue - they're just called "sales taxes".

              That said, I've played around with ideas for changing up our tax system some to account for this sort of stuff. While I think an "automation tax" would be a real mess to figure out, one idea I've had is

        • On the planet scale, yes, definitely, a smaller population is a better population. Although we could also hugely lessen our footprint if we managed to replace our pointless consumerism and manufacture of cheap disposable crap with stuff that is built to last. Back of the napkin calculations for any random household item: quality stuff takes twice the amount of material/energy to make, but can easily have twenty times the lifespan. Thus: getting rid of consumerism - tenfold reduction of our ecological footpr

          • No one anywhere has even the faintest idea how a negative growth economy would function

            You are right, but it needs to happen, as the saying goes necessity is the mother of invention. We will only figure that out once we are forced to.

            I think a good start, as you mention in your first paragraph is stop producing so much crap and consuming for the sake of consuming, that would lead to negative growth but we could still survive comfortably. I think the problem is a physiological one not an economic one, we all just want more.

            If we don't start consuming less and always demand economic growth we j

            • No one anywhere has even the faintest idea how a negative growth economy would function

              You are right, but it needs to happen, as the saying goes necessity is the mother of invention.

              Yeah - you have absolutely no clue, but you are willing to risk the human race because it needs to happen. So after most of the population cannot reproduce, at least tell us the number of people needed to have a viable society - or are you one of the folks who wants to return to hunter gatherer life?

              Perhaps a bit of research on the failure of China's one child program would show just how difficult to impossible it is to mess with population control.

              • I think you are missing the point here. A negative growth economy needs to happen if we want the planet to survive. To not make it happen is also to risk the human race.

                But it does not follow from that that we need to limit population to do that. I pointed out the elimination of consumer crap as an obvious way to reduce our impact in multiples without even reducing quality of life. But all of this is a bit offtopic.

                The whole point of TFA and this thread here is that the population is limiting itself whether

                • I think you are missing the point here. A negative growth economy needs to happen if we want the planet to survive. To not make it happen is also to risk the human race.

                  But it does not follow from that that we need to limit population to do that.

                  What is your point? And how does one have negative growth without limiting population?

                  People are are not one homogeneous mass, and do not all share the same ideas. So if group A decides that by consensus, with no coercion, that they will stop procreating, group B might just decide that this is their time. to rise. So group A departs via old age, and group B now is in command.

                  Another thing that argues for control of reproduction is despite claims to the contrary, humans are biological creatures, and as

          • by ghoul ( 157158 )
            The Old can be exported to poorer countries with cheap labor availibility. Retirement in Costa Rica is pretty good.
      • State pensions took away the need to have children to support you in the old age.

        No it didn't - it turned it into a tragedy of the commons issue. You're depending on other peoples children to support you in old age. That money comes from somewhere...

        • You are right, at least in the case of Japan right now. But the thing is, since the economic activity of a zero-growth population is able to generate a surplus, there also exists a shrinking population that is able to support a zero surplus economy. That is, whether the situation collapses into a tragedy of the commons depends on the rate of population decrease and the economic structure of the society.

          The demographic transition has been going on for two hundred years now. There is a long delay between the

        • State pensions took away the need to have children to support you in the old age.

          No it didn't - it turned it into a tragedy of the commons issue. You're depending on other peoples children to support you in old age. That money comes from somewhere...

          One of my 4 retirement accounts is a pension. Youi might not want to hear this, but the somewhere the money came from is investments. Not a single penny of your tax money is used. My other accounts are all tied to the stock market.

          So who are those children I am stealing money from?

          Also, define tragedy of the commons for us - You use that phrase, I do not think you know what it means

          • Not a single penny of your tax money is used

            Pretty much every single developed country has a tax supported program for the elderly... Just because you have a ton of retirement savings doesn't mean everyone does. In the US that's social security - and it's funded by a payroll tax.

    • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

      Before modernity (invention of affordable high power night light) and after invention of farming, the normal day for >99% of population looked something like this:

      Man
      1. Wake up with the sunrise.
      2. Leave to work in the field.
      3. Work the field until lunch.
      4. Leave the field to collectively eat lunch with the rest of the village.
      5. Go back into the field.
      6. Work the field until dinner.
      7. Leave the field to collectively eat dinner with the rest of the village.
      8. Perform maintenance and repair on private and

    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      No one has time to date and are too tired to make bouncy-bouncy.

      There are loads of nations that have longer working hours where most people are manual labourers who have plenty of time to meet women and make babies.

      I mean the US, compared to Europe is horribly overworked and yet finds time to overpopulate. Jokes aside, the problem with Japan is cultural, it's difficult for people to go out and meet for various social mores, people don't interact outside their social groups and when they do are extremely reserved, even to the point where dating someone who ticks the w

    • Google "rat colony collapse" for a study on a similar effect when rats were provided everything they needed except space.

    • No one has time to date and are too tired to make bouncy-bouncy.

      A while back they had plenty of time and energy to make banzai-banzai, so it could be worse.

  • The oldest population in the world, one of the lowest birth rates, and no emigration. What do you expect?
    • Re:Demographics (Score:4, Informative)

      by Retired Chemist ( 5039029 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:27PM (#63729412)
      sorry immigration. The Japanese are rather xenophobic, so seems unlikely that that will be an answer.
      • Re:Demographics (Score:4, Interesting)

        by thesandbender ( 911391 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:37PM (#63729458)
        Odd. Myself and over half the people I work with are foreigners. The same is true of most of the companies in our industry. The I've been here 5 years and only had one case of blatant racism/xenophobia. We live in a suburb and there are several other foreigners in our building, the neighborhood and the public school my son goes to (which has dedicated classes/teachers to help children catch up on Japanese). It's even becoming common for food in grocery stores to have some english labelling. Not marketing labels but this is "xxxx".

        Have you ever been to Japan or are you just being racist yourself?
        • You may live there, but are you a citizen?
          • Re:Demographics (Score:5, Interesting)

            by rossz ( 67331 ) <ogre@noSpAM.geekbiker.net> on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:45PM (#63729490) Journal

            There are third generation immigrants in Japan who can not gain citizenship. If you are not Japanese, you can not be a citizen.

            • by shmlco ( 594907 )

              Guess that leads to a question. Summary states that the total number of Japanese people had dropped by 800,000. Does the population drop include all residents, or only the number of Japanese citizens?

            • "In 2015, 9,469 applications for Japanese citizenship were approved. The number of foreign residents in Japan applying to naturalize and obtain Japanese citizenship peaked in 2008 at more than 16,000, but declined to 12,442 in 2015." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Japan#Immigrant_integration_into_Japanese_society wikipedia but they have citations)

              Your statement that "If you are not Japanese, you can not be a citizen." is verifiably false.
              • Okay, let's consider this. USA, ~300M people, around 1M naturalized citizens per year. 1/3rd of a percent a year.

                Japan 125M, ~10k/year. A bit more than 1/3rd the population, 1/100th the naturalization.

                Okay, so you can become a citizen, but in reality it's so freaking rare as to not be significant.

                I mean, right in the wiki it states "application criteria are set deliberately high" Also, "historically, the bulk of those taking Japanese citizenship have not been new immigrants but rather special permanent

              • by mjwx ( 966435 )

                "In 2015, 9,469 applications for Japanese citizenship were approved. The number of foreign residents in Japan applying to naturalize and obtain Japanese citizenship peaked in 2008 at more than 16,000, but declined to 12,442 in 2015." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Japan#Immigrant_integration_into_Japanese_society wikipedia but they have citations)

                Your statement that "If you are not Japanese, you can not be a citizen." is verifiably false.

                A peak of 16,000... That tells me that people are heavily discouraged from applying for citizenship. It's not just possible to prevent most people from simply applying, it's quite easy. Lets say you have no ancestry, instant rejection (don't bother applying), no sponsor - no application possible.

                The irony will be lost on you that you demonstrated what he meant, that it is extremely, extremely difficult to attain Japanese citizenship if you're not Japanese whilst desperately trying to prove him wrong by

            • Source? While Japanese citizenship is inherited, not granted by being born in Japan they do naturalize people from other countries. It sounds like few people seek naturalization in Japan compared to other countries. My guess is that being a citizen does not change one's status as an inherent foreigner.
          • No, I don't want to give up citizenship in my own country and that's what stops most people I know from getting it. I do work with several people who are naturalized citizens though. The process isn't that much different from most countries save for adequate Japanese fluency being difficult for a lot of people.

            If you have an interest in the subject, I recommend you read academic material on the subject and talk to people who live here. Your understanding of the situation is misinformed.
        • Do not mistake politeness with being accepting. I just got a new contact for one of our offices in Japan. Even though his name is Japanese the first thing our local ex-pat told me about the new guy was that he was not Japanese.

          I'm not sure if he's half Japanese or possibly a mix of some other Asian ethnicity... but I found it extremely odd that was the first comment made to me.
          • Most people take a Japanese name when they become a citizen. A number of reasons, not the least of which is a lot of Japanese systems don't work well if you don't have a Kanji name (e.g. apply for credit cards or trying to open a bank account with just your name in katakana is hit or miss. You'll run into weird/frustrating situations like you can't pay your credit card with a bank transfer because the bank truncates your name so the don't match. KYC is a PITA here, even for Japanese citizens).

            And your
      • by bjoast ( 1310293 )
        Great, here comes the immigration propaganda. How will immigration help create more Japanese people?
    • Every country on the planet except a few African countries have birth rates below sustainability. How much longer do you think countries like China and India are going to keep sending their young to America? Eventually they'll stop by force if necessary.
      • by shmlco ( 594907 )

        India may not have a choice if GW continues to produce the kind of heatwaves we've seen recently. It's either migrate or roast in place.

        • by ghoul ( 157158 )
          Indians are already used to high temps. We have the social structures , tribal knowledge and public infrastructure to deal with it. Its Europe which needs to worry about warming where most older housing is built to keep the heat in and kill off pensioners each summer.
  • We're doing our part to reduce over consumption of resources!
  • by VeryFluffyBunny ( 5037285 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:34PM (#63729444)
    I'm sure Japanese people would like to have children just like in any other country. The question is why aren't they? What's preventing or discouraging all those couples from deciding to take the plunge & get into parenthood? When you know that, then you can ask why isn't the govt removing those barriers & easing the way to starting families? What's more important than their impending demographic existential crisis?
    • What's preventing or discouraging all those couples

      Those who are into a couple might get children, but there are just fewer and fewer of these couples. Marriage rate dropped by a factor of 5 according to https://www.nippon.com/en/japa... [nippon.com] and men justify by economic arguments.

      Quoting a study:

      "More than a quarter of people in their 30s--25.4 percent of women and 26.5 percent of men--said in a survey that they have no wish to get married. [...] 28.3 percent of men 50 years old and 17.8 percent of women of that age were unmarried in 2020. [...] Many men cited 'unstable employment' or 'a lack of earning power to maintain a married life'. [...] 'Now that the idea behind the Japanese family has changed, marriage is no longer seen as a safety net to guarantee a stable life.'"

      https://www.asahi.com/ajw/arti... [asahi.com]

      My personal idea is that their cities are densely populated at the point many have to live in micro-appartments. 21% of apartments in Tokyo have less than 20 m^2 -- 212 ft^2 https://questionjapan.com/blog... [questionjapan.com] . It does not encourage the

      • So a decent middle class life has become too expensive, work doesn't pay enough, isn't stable enough, and is too uncertain to find in the first place? Yeah, those are all logical reasons to hunker down and not sign up for a 20+ year economic commitment.

        I have one kid, one and done. I honestly find that USA culture is low level hostile to kids. There is no playground within walkable distance of our house (just a grassy park mostly used by dog owners). Kids playing in the street, or even just walking solo

        • by Bob_Who ( 926234 )

          Wanna take your kid on a plane (or to any public space), you'll risk offending those around you if your kid acts like a kid. Kids should be welcomed as the newest important members of our society, but instead are treated as nuisances.

          Actually, you're right, you can't blame a kid for behaving like a kid. Just treat the parents like nuisances, that works much better.

      • Are the Japanese government doing anything to effectively address these issues? e.g. Addressing precarious, underpaid employment? Putting effective limits on working hours? Improving housing stock & making it more affordable? Improving Japanese citizens' standard of living & quality of life? It's not as if Japan's a poor country (ranked 28th by GDP per capita). Where's all the money that those citizens are generating going?
    • They're too "smart" to have kids. They "know" they don't have "enough" money to properly raise them, they "know" that the world is not a "good enough" place to bring them into, etc., etc.

      These people don't realize that the lesson from the movie "Idiocracy" is not that "stupid" people are going to take over the world, but that "smart" people are going to make themselves extinct.

      If you provide basic love, care, and education for your kids, there's a good chance that they will make the most of it. Human child

    • by Petrini ( 49261 )

      I'm sure Japanese people would like to have children just like in any other country.

      Why are you sure? Most things I've read about contemporary Japanese women would indicate that they don't agree with you.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Japan appointed the first minister in charge of raising the birth rate a couple of decades ago, and they have all been ineffective and often somewhat hapless. I recall the first one defined the problem as the "short supply of baby making machines", i.e. women of the right age who want children.

      So for a very long time the government has been struggling to understand the causes, and only doing some obvious things like trying to improve access to childcare, that have limited effect.

      It boils down to young peopl

  • by Your Anus ( 308149 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:36PM (#63729454) Journal
    Immigration. You keep up your population by letting other people join your country.
    • Yup, Matt Yglesias wrote a book about this called "One Billion Americans" and he makes a compelling case.

      Here's an interview: https://www.vox.com/future-per... [vox.com]

    • Yes that's the solution, outsource breeding. Its good that populations are decreasing its just going to hurt a bit for a while adjusting to support a relatively larger older population, but we can deal with it by removing the insane bureaucracy that we now have.

      • by Bob_Who ( 926234 )

        Yes that's the solution, outsource breeding. Its good that populations are decreasing its just going to hurt a bit for a while adjusting to support a relatively larger older population, but we can deal with it by removing the insane bureaucracy that we now have.

        So that just leaves us with regular and extra crispy...,,

  • by Sydin ( 2598829 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:38PM (#63729462)

    A fundamental disconnect exists for Japanese women that discourages having children for the ambitious, intelligent, and highly educated. Once a woman becomes pregnant in Japan she's expected to totally drop her career to focus on being a mother and housewife to support her child and partner. Of course some do return to work and on paper support structures like maternity leave exists, but generally they're pushed heavily to leave the workforce and can face being stigmatized for returning to work. A natural result of those cultural expectations paired with increasing higher education rates for women is that more will hold off or avoid entirely having children so they can continue their careers.

    • by Moof123 ( 1292134 ) on Monday July 31, 2023 @06:18PM (#63729600)

      Sadly, even in European countries with very good maternity/paternity policies there is still below replacement level child birth. Ecologically this is not a bad thing. Economically speaking it is causing a lot of hand wringing. Wealth without growth seems to not be an understood thing, and we are told it is not a viable thing (I'm skeptical this is true).

      So while I agree that lack of support for career oriented parents is lacking badly in a lot of countries, it seems to not be the driving force for the drop in birth rate. Even with very good support it is clear that the ROI for having a kid is severely negative. Being a working parent sucks in a lot of ways kind of how matter how you slice it, and even with Nordic level safeguards it still results in a drop in pay, promotions, and job prospects for most parents. I don't mean to say we shouldn't support families (we should), but in multiple studies there has been little to no fertility improvement shown for significant increases in family support across many countries.

      Objectively speaking, parenting is a hell of a lot of thankless unpaid work. One only has to have a couple DINK friends to get reminded of this. I think that once this reality sinks into our collective consciousness it is really hard to reverse low fertility as a trend so long as there is access to birth control (again, I am not advocating we get rid of access either).

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by HuskyDog ( 143220 )

        Objectively speaking, parenting is a hell of a lot of thankless unpaid work.

        How is it "thankless"? Speaking as a parent, I find that the experience of parenthood is filled with joy and thanks and that joy and thanks comes from your children!!! My daughter is now at University and I've been teaching her to drive. Yesterday she passed her test (which in the UK is tough) and seeing her do so was yet another of the many many moments of joy which we have shared over the years.

        I have to say that I find the great majority of the comments here mysterious. It seems that people are look

      • by kubajz ( 964091 )
        One country that is bucking the trend in Europe is Hungary. I am not sayin anything about the other policies of its government but during the last 10 years they have managed to increase marriage rates by over 90 percent and birth rates by some 40 percent (chart here [worldbank.org])
        • by Bob_Who ( 926234 )

          One country that is bucking the trend in Europe is Hungary. I am not sayin anything about the other policies of its government but during the last 10 years they have managed to increase marriage rates by over 90 percent and birth rates by some 40 percent (chart here [worldbank.org])

          No wonder they're so Hungry....and well, hung.

    • Japan isn't unique here, all rich countries I know of have a birth rate bellow replacement and even the world rates are going down it is at 2.3, I think 2.1 is replacement rate, its definitely at least 2.

      Source: https://data.worldbank.org/ind... [worldbank.org]

      There are always is some social pressure for people to conform to society, and whatever Japans society expects doesn't explain why the entire world is behaving the same way.

    • by Tyr07 ( 8900565 )

      That might be part of it, but the largest part is the men. Marriage market is being decimated as well. To put it blunt, woman don't want traditional roles, but want traditional benefits. IE she's a modern woman, and can do what she wants, and sleep with as many people as she wants, but uh...you need to pay the bills, because it's traditional.

      It runs deeper than that but that's the gist. Also in looks, 4-6s think they deserve a man who makes 200k, is over 6 ft, has no kids etc. Bottom line is, men decided w

  • We are going to be in this boat in a decade too.

  • Demographic collapse is going to happen to China and others (listen to Peter Zeihan a bit)

    I wonder if it can be reversed by spending piles of cash - 1 million for each child, + 50k/yr per child until they are 18 might reverse the trend.

    People aren't having kids because they are expensive luxuries - if they can be significant sources of income and financial security (like they used to be before we got all 1st world) again, it might change.

    • Children are expensive if you are rich, they are not if you are poor, I don't know about the US but if you don't have any money in most countries the state will support them.

    • People aren't having kids because they are expensive luxuries

      Children are expensive, in money, and in time. As a parent, you spend a lifetime taking care of, providing for, and protecting your children, long after they are adults. Parents give up personal time for their children, out of love. Couples vacations, about the parents, are now family vacations, about the entire family.

      During the online meetings during the COVID lock-downs, I was surprised by the number of parents complaining about spending more time with their children.

    • by Tyr07 ( 8900565 )

      And who is going to pay for it? Everyone who doesn't have kids?

      People aren't having kids because men don't want to get married because the ROI is non-existent in first world countries. I'm okay with people making whatever choices suits your life, but this is the outcome, you have to accept that as well.

  • I am thinking: If there's lots of housing, and fewer people, then the price of housing should go down.

    If the price of housing goes down, then that would mean that living should cost less.

    If living costs less, then I would think people would have more children.

    • by ffkom ( 3519199 )
      Indeed, I wonder why there is so much drama about this. Japan is pretty densely populated already, and it seems reasonable to not increase population density further. Sure there will be a phase when there are more elderly people around, and sure that has some effects on demand and supply of work force. Manual labor becomes more expensive, and there is more incentive to invest in automation. But in the long run, a smaller population is easier to sustain with the resources available, especially with regards t
      • by ghoul ( 157158 )
        Japanese cities are densely populated. The countryside is emptying out to the extent that even those who want to stay, cant as social infrastructure like schools and hospitals close down.
    • by jandoe ( 6400032 )

      Of course they will not go extinct. As the population will grow older they will need to bring a lot of immigrants to take care of people. This will completely change the culture and people will start having children again. Population size will stabilize around some sensible number.

      • Or they can bring in foreign workers and never let them gain citizenship.

        • by jandoe ( 6400032 )

          I guess it is possible to end up with small group of Japanese people running the country and bunch of immigrants doing all the work and not having voting rights, especially in a country as racist as Japan. But my guess is that they will start marrying immigrants at some point and their mixed kids will have citizenship.

  • ... failed to dent population decline ...

    "We're all out of ideas and we've tried nothing".

    The aging population of Japan want to fix the consequences of their selfishness without losing their sense of entitlement. Italy is in the same predicament. We're seeing this dynamic in other countries but driven by other societal problems, such as wealth inequality and climate-change inaction.

    • We chose two kids max for (amongst other) climate reasons. From my friends group at university, we are one of the few couples who have kids. Some chose to live alone and live a simple life. Others chose for their careers. Others just don't want to settle... I think it is nice that people make that choice. It makes reuniuns a lot more fun. Less people is also the way to go for sustainability. Society will just have to adapt and face the consequences.
  • > In January, prime minister Fumio Kishida said that addressing the birthrate was "now or never" and warned, "Our nation is on the cusp of whether it can maintain its societal functions."

    What absolute bullshit! They aren't heading for zero population anytime soon and a lower population just means more land and resources to go around. Reducing population is a good thing. Controlling our population growth is one of those things that's supposed to separate humans from dumb animals.

    Climate change, resource s

  • It's pretty simple. I support everyones freedom of choice, but while you're young, you may tell that guy no, you don't want him, and don't want to marry him (Let's be honest, Chad is a way better bad boy right now). That's okay, you need to make that choice for yourself. When you're both old, you might decide you want to marry that guy, but he might decide he doesn't want you anymore. That's okay too!

    Welcome to the results.

  • by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Tuesday August 01, 2023 @10:34AM (#63731338) Homepage

    Let's get this out of the way: problems with social programs, where the young support the old, are well known. Let's disregard that for the moment.

    In almost every other respect, a shrinking population is a good thing. Environmental problems? Problems with jobs being increasingly automated? Housing being too expensive? These problems and many more are improved by reducing population. In particular, climate problems. Just yesterday I was watching a nature program that talked about the way people are encroaching on nature reserves in Africa. Why? Population pressure. [populationpyramid.net] In fact, population is dropping in all Western countries as well, if you disregard immigration. Again, this is a good thing. We need to get Africa under control, and the entire world population would start dropping to sustainable levels.

"It's the best thing since professional golfers on 'ludes." -- Rick Obidiah

Working...