Posted on 11/20/2006 4:15:46 AM PST by shrinkermd
...But why not? For a population to hold steady, every woman must give birth on average to 2.1 children. When the birthrate drops below 1.5 and stays there for any time, it's almost impossible to recover, given the momentum of demographics. Below 1.3 is considered "lowest-low." China is at 1.7 and dropping. Japan last year clocked in at 1.25.
As a result, Japan's population, now about 128 million, is expected to fall to about 100 million by mid-century. Big deal, you might say. Wasn't Japan happy enough 50 years ago, when it blew through the 100 million mark on the way up?
Yes, but it was a very different 100 million then. In 1965 there were 25 million children in Japan, 67 million people of working age and 6 million senior citizens. In 2050 there will be 11 million children, 54 million potential workers and 36 million people 65 and over. No one knows whether such a society can maintain a spirit of innovation, or how its capitalists will adapt to a shrinking market. There will potentially be a lot more dependents for every productive worker
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
..."It brings you to a very tough question," Toru Suzuki says. "What is happiness? Can we be happy without economic growth?"
...At least Japan will find out from a starting position of wealth. China, which imposed a one-child policy before it had developed economically, may get old before it gets rich. That will be a first, too....
Good, factual article. Washington Post can produce something when it is not crusading against President Bush and the conservatives.
The same is true here. One of the many reasons Social Security should be shifted asap to an investment-based vs. soak-the-next-generation basis.
This article reminded me of the one on France written last month.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/17/AR2006101701652.html
"While falling birthrates threaten to undermine economies and social stability across much of an aging Europe, French fertility rates are increasing. France now has the second-highest fertility rate in Europe -- 1.94 children born per woman, exceeded slightly by Ireland's rate of 1.99. The U.S. fertility rate is 2.01 children."
It described the policies France is deliberately pursuing to prevent a shrinking native population. I believe the author of the article about Japan is correct. The Japanese aren't convinced that a shrinking population is a problem. If they were, they would try to fix it as France it.
Is a drastic decline in populaiton still considered a population explosion? Please tell me what to think, MSM, it's all so confusing!
Oh, no. Our overlords are importing millions of third world workers, mainly illegal, to shore up the program. Each of them is having more than enough children to make up for the deficit in reproduction among the middle class too busy working and paying the taxes to notice what's going on.
We'll be fine as long as we learn Spanish, Chinese, Arabic . . . and our rightful place alongside the third world hordes. < / sarcasm >
"One of the many reasons Social Security should be shifted asap to an investment-based vs. soak-the-next-generation basis.
If there are enough retirees, that may not work. What will they all invest in? Where will the growing businesses be if there are not enough young workers?
I wonder how much of France's increase is birthrate is among its immigrant Muslim population.
I think it's just about all of it.
Tom Thumb?
But, how much of France's fertility is due to higher fertility among its large Muslim population?
Shrinking... birthrate? - shucks!
I thought this was going to be a Global Warming™ thread.
8^)
Almost all of Frances' increased fertility rates are from immigrants. I am told that the rural French also enjoy large families, but not as large as the immigrants.
The Washington Post catches up to Mark Steyn! It's the demographics stupid!
The reporter may want to read AMERCIA ALONE.
'While falling birthrates threaten to undermine economies and social stability across much of an aging Europe, French fertility rates are increasing. France now has the second-highest fertility rate in Europe -- 1.94 children born per woman, exceeded slightly by Ireland's rate of 1.99. The U.S. fertility rate is 2.01 children.'
How do these numbers from France match up with Mark Steyn's numbers? I was thinking he had France under 1.5.
You think Japan is scary... You should see China!
The Washington Post is actually pretty good at reporting information when it does not deal with Bush and his "guys" in Congress.
A while ago, they had a good article on France's economic problems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.