I think they might also need to maybe leave work at a reasonable time.
And not get molested the whole way home by some guy that thinks he’s in the old boy’s club. And not get fired because they’re a married woman now, and need to stay home (literally normal there).
Like, people are losing interest in kids everywhere, but in the core Western countries nobody’s nervous to get married because they get socially demoted in the process. That’s a theme I’ve definitely heard from women over there, and probably why it’s happening faster.
They… they could’ve done this the entire time?
yes. damn. what an idea
Decreasing birthrates are a good thing. You can’t have unlimited growth
They are definitely not inherently good or bad it depends on the place, but if there is 1 child born per woman in the country, that means the country given enough time will pretty rapidly shrink, unless they change something about people not wanting to have kids or allow immigration
Also…loosen immigration laws?
I know it’s a very closed off nation with deep cultural roots that is very weary of outsiders…
I don’t mind finding work in Japan… …if it wasn’t so hostile to workers
So far, Japan is near the bottom of my list for western countries to work at, and I would much rather find a job in Korea instead
Japan is near the bottom of my list for western countries
Japan is an Eastern country. In fact, it’s the farthest East county possible.
I think the words you were looking for were “first world countries”.
Japan is an Eastern country. In fact, it’s the farthest East county possible.
No love for New Zealand huh?
New Zealand? What’s that?
What’s a New Zealand?
Checked my map, it’s not there
It’s an updated version of a Dutch province
its so east that it loops back around to being west
It’s*
Syntax mistake—not grammar
[Pedentry intensitfies]
Appropriate user name, though.
Syntax would be more like sentence structure and order. Contractions are indeed grammar.
Nobody takes that to be literally about geography anymore. Japan might be far away from Texas, but it’s politically a lot closer than Russia just a ferry ride away.
Developed*
Depends on your meridian.
Po-tay-to po-tah-to doesn’t really matter to distinguish between them when what I meant was clear, although I probably would’ve said first world if I was nitpicking my post before sending
deleted by creator
Racist, the word is racist
I know… 😔
Additionally, the word is “wary”
Love all races. Except the human race. Terrible, awful people they are.
Now this is a racist idea I can agree with.
(Although, I actually bet aliens are shit as well at the equivalent stage of development)
I know it’s a very closed off nation with deep cultural roots that is very weary of outsiders…
Europe doesn’t get to use that excuse, and neither should they. I don’t care how different whale meat shashimi seems from foi gras, or bonsai from tulip arrangements.
That’s crazy talk, you’d get lot’s of filthy foreigners in that way.
Absolutely! Even if it’s unlikely to happen, we shouldn’t let that distract us from what the best decisions would be.
Oh fuck, oh fuck, our ponzi scheme is about to enter the find out phase.
Capitalism is totally different from a ponzi scheme. In a ponzi scheme, the profits go up to the person at the top and you always need new people that come in, otherwise the whole thing will fall apart and the people at the bottom will be the ones that suffer. Under capitalism however, the profits of everyone’s work will go up to the top and you always need new workers to come in, otherwise the system will fall apart and the people at the bottom will suffer. Totally different.
otherwise the system will fall apart and the people at the bottom will suffer.
Don’t you mean “suffer more”?
True
Hm. There is a difference.
Once crapitalists run out of “new horizons” to “expand” into, they start cannibalizing their current workforce and raise prices while lowering quality for customers.
Do not be fooled. Quality is going down because profits are going up.
*MarkWahlburg.gif
Maybe this ponzi. Unfunded state pensions use workers contributions to pay current pensioners.
Less workers = less pensions.
That’s still not a Ponzi scheme even if it isn’t sustainable.
I think it actually fits quite well.
A Ponzi scheme is a form of fraud that lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors.
Meanwhile, the current pension system in most countries depend on a growing population to spread out the payments for pensioners over multiple workers.
Ponzi schemes collapse when there aren’t enough investors to sustain the dividends to be paid to the existing investors. Most countries’ pensions rely on an increasing amount of working age inhabitants to pay retirees and are now having issues paying out pensions due to the shift in demographics, that’s why many countries have been increasing the retirement age recently.
There are 2 solutions to this.
- Increasing birth rates, this option is not sustainable in the long term but is commonly preferred for reasons mentioned below.
- Migration. There are currently plenty of countries with a large working-age population and a weak economy. Letting those migrate would solve the demographic issue, but is political suicide.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how these funds work.
The goal is not to pay people with the money from new people paying into the pot. They invest the money and then the pot grows and that money is used to pay out. When the pot is not growing enough - whether because investments aren’t doing well enough, or you designed a you designed an bad system where people can withdraw from it for too long, or any other many possible issues - then yes you functionally end up dipping into the money given by new people, but this is not how it was designed to be used.
You are acting like this is a one-to-one system where you just put money in, then you get money out later, and all of the money given out is 100% the money that people put in in the first place with no intention of growing that money or finding a sustainable way of disseminating it long-term.
Mismanagement/poorly built systems are not the same as Ponzi schemes. Unless you think, I don’t know, US Social Security is also a Ponzi scheme?
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how these funds work.
This misunderstanding is on your side. There is a method of funding pensions refered to as pay as you go (PAYG).
The goal is not to pay people with the money from new people paying into the pot.
This is exactly how many unfunded, state sponsored pension schemes function. No pot of money exists. Only the ability to collect taxes.
They invest the money and then the pot grows and that money is used to pay out.
This is true for private pension schemes run by companies and individual pension schemes. Funded pension schemes are (usually) not ponzis.
State pension plans are primarily funded (in order of what comprises the most) by 1) the government 2) investments and 3) employee contributions.
Pay as you go is about employee contributions, which is typically the smallest pot being contributed. I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.
Of course I understand that the money that is put in is invested, but that doesn’t mean the problem goes away when the system relies on the “pot” growing at a certain rate.
EDIT:
Mismanagement/poorly built systems are not the same as Ponzi schemes. Unless you think, I don’t know, US Social Security is also a Ponzi scheme?
I’m not implying that it’s the same, just that the comparison fits better than you might expect.
In most PAYG state pensions the contributions made by workers are not invested. They are paid directly to pensioners.
When did I ever say the problem goes away? I am saying it is not a Ponzi scheme. You were saying it is a Ponzi scheme. Don’t move the goalposts here.
Mismanagement/poorly built systems are not the same as Ponzi schemes
“Tell me the difference between stupid and illegal and I’ll have my wife’s brother arrested”
Daycare/Kindergarten is already free across the country for all children starting at 3 years old.
All child healthcare is also free after a prefecture-set monthly premium (usually about 1000 yen).
This policy announcement is specifically about making the 0-3 year old gap free.
Honestly I’d rather just see the government pay more into the shakai hoken (the national insurance that pays for mother/father leave) so people can take more time off from work early on in the kids’ lives.
Making it easier for parents to go back to work instead of focusing what’s good for children and parents seems par for the course.
The only solution is to make childcare paid i.e. every single person that has a child gets a stipend worth a full time job.
Because it is a full time job.
Daycare/Kindergarten is already free across the country for all children starting at 3 years old.
My information might be biased towards the greater Kanto area (Tokyo/Yokohama), but I’m not aware of anybody paying less then 20000 Yen (a little over $100 USD I guess) per month per child for a place in a public daycare (can be more than double, depending on the area/daycare, and much more for private ones).
It’s much more complicated, though. You can receive various support money from the state/prefecture/city, but it’s usually less than what you have to pay. And you’re not guaranteed a place, and the waiting list cam be long (especially in highly populated areas in Tokyo).
I’m not sure why your friends are paying that… Most cities in Saitama, Chiba, and the 23 wards at least I know that the 学費 was set as 無償化.
There are some instances where you don’t qualify for free school if you make too much money. (Or it could just be they didn’t have a good guide at the city office to walk them through the maze of beaurocracy)
Also 23 wards and most of the cities in Saitama and Chiba have daycare and kindergarten entry that’s points based(the larger cities have more kids than daycare spots, which is my favorite bit of irony about the Japanese birthrate problems), the more points you have (points based on need, like are you a single mother, both parents working full time etc.)
Why is it framed like it’s something extreme?
This was my reaction also. WoOoAh! Free daycare? How radical!! Haha
I read it as snark/sarcasm. Like they are adding something that already should be.
Japan: Nah, we’re good.
Decent first step, but it’s going to take an actual investment in making parenthood desirable.
Parenthood is already desirable. There’s a biological drive and social conditioning to desire it for most people. The disincentives have just become overwhelming. Children take a hell of a lot of resources. Every aspect of modern society has drained all the time, money, energy, emotional resiliance, social support, etc that people need.
Also the future is bleak in the poly-crisis.
Did you watch the new Tom Nicholas video, by chance?
I’m logically aware that’s the case for other people, but I find it perplexing why often times. I was sterilized in my mid 20s, and I haven’t ever regretted it.
Same. I suspect fomo. I experience that for other things but I never bought that kids thing.
Meh
There are many other social factors that make parenthood undesirable in Japan that this does not address.
Capitalism literally has failed the human race
Always has.
Who wants to have kids in a place where you’re expected to work 18 hours a day?
I will never have a child if they have to work 5/7ths of their life away just to scrape by like me.
That’s no way to live.
Amen, I’m in constant pain. Don’t really feel the need to perpetuate that.
Wait until they will discover affordable housing thing.
Wait until you find out it is normal to tip your landlord there
Usually the newer buildings owned by larger real estate groups don’t do they kept money thing anymore.
I’ve only really seen it in buildings owned by small real estate concerns and old dudes.
It’s luckily getting kind of pushed out as a normal thing, just slowly.
Only once in my life have I got my damage deposit back. That is tipping the landlord a lot of money. The time I got it back was in a terrible situation and I had leverage over the parasite.
They also have security deposits on top of that
Housing in Tokyo is known for being relatively affordable, actually.
ya it’s funny when you watch some videos about “small apartments” in tokyo and only to realize they are still more cheaper and spacious than some NA options in big cities.
less expensive more expansive
Not in Tokyo, but farther out in Tokyo’s residential cities (outside the 23 wards like Chiba and Saitama)
It’s even cheaper the farther you get from train stations. There’s a 30 minute walk “cliff” where residential land prices plummet when you’re more than 30 minutes walk away from a train station.
If I lived in Tokyo, though, I certainly wouldn’t want to be a 30+ minute walk from a train station. That makes leaving home a pretty big task.
30m walking is like a sub-10 minute bike ride. No biggie!
you could always use a bicycle
Housing is pretty affordable in Japan since housing in Japan is not an investment, it depreciates like a car (only the land has value, the house ontop of it has literally negative value since it’s assumed anyone will want to bulldoze it), and their lax zoning allows for continual densification to happen.
Isn’t the cost of living in Japan like extremely high, and work basically breaks your back for no overtime?
IIRC rent and food are relatively cheap compared to the US, and you don’t have to own a car which is a pretty big savings.
Afaik Japan is actually kind of cheap. About 1500 per month including rent in Tokyo if this is right.
The overtime thing depends on your actual job. It’s not like literally everyone is being exploited.
Not cheap. That’s how much a flat for one person costs in Zurich centre. You just have insanely high rents.
I just checked out of curiosity and you’re full of crap. Zurich is far more expensive than Tokyo (or any other place in Japan).
Hey, cost of living, without rent. I’m talking about rent though.
2 rooms flats start at around CHF 1300, if you’re lucky.
Edit: ah, you meant Japan side is rent and living.
If you actually read the page, you’ll find that it does have a price for the rent. The other part was precisely my point. Rent in Japan is a lot lower. 1500 includes rent and cost of living.
I said “including” rent. The rent alone is about 560USD. I haven’t lived in Zurich but I know for a fact that Basel is about twice as expensive.
Basel has insanely high rents too.
Lose the “too” and you might be onto something.
What governments and corporations never understand and will never want to understand is that …
… it isn’t about the quantity of life … or even the quantity of people who are alive or are born
… it’s about the quality of life
If everyone lives a comfortable, safe and fulfilling life without risk of poverty or losing everything they have, then they are more likely to have children and raise them to become productive people who will contribute to society.
Otherwise if you don’t take care of people, they will either have no children or a bunch of children that will all grow up to become a burden to society.
“Life without risk of poverty”?! That desperation and fear is the only way I can staff my sweatshops!
Maybe we should be less focused on making more people, and more focused on enabling living people to work together to meet each other’s needs?
People will have children. But the only thing that pushes the nationalistic desires to have a positive birth rate is the zealotry around eternal 3%+ growth of financial product. That needs a growing consumer base.
We could be achieving an economic degrowth while simultaneously increasing the standard of living. Instead we have tech billionaires, a venture capitalist class, and a war on women’s(as well everyone else’s) bodily autonomy.
There’s a climate catastrophe caused by human overpopulation. How did you miss that?
The climate catastrophe is caused by a hyper-reliance on fossil fuels & deliberately shitty transport infrastructure (i.e. the private automobile & it’s consequences), entirely for financial reasons; not just raw numbers of people.
If everyone lives a comfortable, safe and fulfilling life without risk of poverty or losing everything they have, then they are more likely to have children and raise them to become productive people who will contribute to society.
You would assume that, but is it really true? The countries with the safest and most comfortable lives, in Scandinavia, have the lowest birth rates. The countries with the least safe and comfortable lives, in Africa, have the highest birth rates.
Well, countries with higher birthrates have a third option that is essentially negligible in those with lower birthrates, which is not even making it to adulthood. Effectively still less children end up becoming productive members of society. And together with that, due to less available social services, often a goal of having children survive is so they can take care of the parent when they’re older.
As soon as infant mortality becomes a non-factor, birthrates decline drastically as well. And since children are no longer largely seen as a “life assurance” for when parents are older, and the society’s demands for productive members is higher as well, the focus really does shift to the quality of the life and the two types of reasons to have kids are harder to compare. But even among developed nations you can see differences in fertility rates.
Maybe I’m reading into this wrong, but I think the interpretation of fertility statistics may be underestimating/overlooking how much rape and sexual violence contributes to the high fertility rates we’re seeing in impoverished countries struggling with widespread violence.
Countries like the ones in Scandinavia have lower rape statistics and access to abortion which could explain a lot about those numbers and why they are the way they are. Again, it’s a just hypothesis, but one worth mentioning I think.
Wait, so young people aren’t having kids because… its insanely expensive to do so? I thought it was because they invented pronouns.
Hmm sarcastic or not sarcastic… This is a hard one. I’m going to guess sarcastic.
Not good to make assumptions. Better to Downvote and report. Even if you guess right, some bigot may think it validates their hatred.
