Posted on 06/01/2006 8:00:39 PM PDT by nypokerface
TOKYO - Japan's birth rate in 2005 dropped to a record low of 1.25 babies per woman, the Health Ministry reported Thursday, adding to concerns over the country's aging population and its economy.
Japan also reported a negative birth rate for the first time on record, with the number of deaths in 2005 exceeding births by 21,408.
The trend threatens to leave Japan with a labor shortage, erode the country's tax base and strain the pension system as fewer taxpayers support an expanding elderly population.
The country's birth rate was 1.29 in both 2003 and 2004, already the lowest figure since the government began releasing birth figures in 1947, according to the Health Ministry.
The new figures "show that our efforts to deal with the declining birth rate have been important and necessary. The data must be accepted gravely," Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said.
Accounting for infant mortality and other factors, fewer than 2.1 babies per Japanese woman represents negative population growth, with potentially dire consequences for the economy and the care of the elderly.
The number of births in Japan stood at 1,062,604 last year, down 48,117 from the previous year, statistics released by the ministry showed. The number of deaths totaled 1,084,012, up 55,410 from 2004.
The drop in births, despite government efforts to encourage couples to have more children, also reflects changing lifestyles. Many women are foregoing or delaying marriage to pursue career opportunities.
The average age of newlyweds last year was 28 for women and 29.8 for men, both up by 0.2 years.
In an attempt to encourage women to have more babies, the government began a five-year project last year to build more daycare centers, while encouraging men to take paternity leave.
Yet Japanese companies typically expect long hours from workers, and many women with careers feel they cannot meet the demands of both work and family and must choose one or the other.
Thursday's report follows the recent release of gloomy population data.
In April, the government confirmed the nation's population had fallen from a year earlier for the first time on record, declining by 8,340 from December 2004 to November 2005. It was the first yearly decline since the government began compiling data in 1899, though data for 1944-1946 are missing.
Japan isn't alone in worrying about the need to encourage births.
In the 25-nation European Union, the average birth rate is around 1.5, dropping to less than 1.3 in some countries, including Greece, Spain, Italy and new EU member nations in eastern Europe where fertility rates slumped after the collapse of communism.
Last month, President Vladimir Putin called population declines of hundreds of thousands a year one of Russia's most serious problems and urged parliament to offer financial incentives for families to have more children.
2000's -- Global Warming! We're all going to die! But maybe the population crash will destroy our welfare state first!
About 8,000 Marines are going to be redeployed to Guam. Now Japan, think about it. Do you really want all those young healthy horny young men to leave? Think about it!
How about closing those on-demand, walk through abortion clinics that are all over the place?
Cut the outrageous taxes. Japan is very expensive to live in.
We have some extra Mexicans that we can loan.
Japan and Western Europe are in serious danger and facing a major cultural and demographic shift on this.
They're not reproducing at sustainable levels, but need population to make their economies work.
The replacement population is Islamic, and we all know what that means.
We are approaching the same nexus, with the replacement population being generated by Mexico in our case.
All you patriotic folks of childbearing age out there better get busy.
I wonder if that is going to happen any time soon.
"We are approaching the same nexus, with the replacement population being generated by Mexico in our case."
Nope. U.S. fertility rate is enough to sustain our present population. No illegal aliens needed!
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html
I am - we're working on our fifth!
You are mistaken. A fertility rate of 2.06 is below replacement after you consider infant, child, and adult mortality.
Maybe V. Fox could ship a year's worth of guest workers to Japan and give us a break.
The European-American birth rate is barely above replacement level. There is a positive animus against having children until all the conditions are right.
"The European-American birth rate is barely above replacement level. There is a positive animus against having children until all the conditions are right."
I don't disagree. However, I don't know if I believe that an ever increasing population is a goal to be sought after.
"You are mistaken. A fertility rate of 2.06 is below replacement after you consider infant, child, and adult mortality."
Replacement fertility for developed nations is usually determined to be about 2.1. The U.S. at 2.09 is right around this level. Some estimates of U.S. fertility are around 2.13. I posted the lowest figure I'd seen.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7834459&dopt=Abstract
I would also imagine that as those immigrants become assimilated that their fertility will drop to the low American levels. Therefore, the continuing problem of needing immigration to provide a labor force; because of the very low US fertility.
Births to Immigrants in America
"In 2002, 23 percent of all births in the United States were to immigrant mothers (legal or illegal), compared to 15 percent in 1990, 9 percent in 1980, and 6 percent in 1970."
Well, my Japanese wife and I have done our part to reverse the declining birth rate here!
Do you think an ever aging population is OK, or the fact that nearly a large fraction of babies born in the USA are not European-American? The former is one cause of ever growing medical costs in the country and the diversion of so many resources to people who will become ever less productive. The latter is a threat to the dominant culture of the nation.
2.09 per woman is probably about right for the overall population: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html
But the birth rate for non hispanic white women is the lowest and nowhere near replacement. That's why we need to either (a) increase our birth rate or (b) accept that the ethnic composition of the U.S. and Europe will change dramatically over the longer term.
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.