▲ 391 ▼ Anon is waiting for Japan (sh.itjust.works) submitted 1 year ago by Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works [M] to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works 185 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
