Slashdot Mirror


Japan's Population Falls At Fastest Rate Since 1968

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Japan's population, excluding resident foreigners, fell at the beginning of this year at its fastest pace since comparable figures were kept in 1968, highlighting the demographic challenge to economic growth. As of Jan. 1, the number of Japanese people fell by a record 308,084 from a year earlier to 125,583,658, marking the eighth consecutive year of declines, government data showed Wednesday. The number of births fell 2.9 percent from the previous year ago to 981,202, the lowest since comparable data became available in 1974. People aged 65 or older accounted for 27.2 percent of the total population, the highest ratio on record, while the ratio of those aged 14 or younger fell to a record low of 12.7 percent, the data showed. The number of registered foreign residents increased to 2,323,428, up 6.9 percent from a year earlier, according to the data.

295 comments

  1. Testosterone levels by butchersong · · Score: 0

    Recent studies have shown that in the US the average man of any age has about half his grandfathers testosterone level. It would be interesting to see if Japan faces an even steeper decline among its males.

    1. Re: Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Those results are skewed down by inclusion of millennials who often have zero or negative testosterone when they are self-identifying as female.

    2. Re: Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And parent knows this through direct experience. He has a cute little man-clit too.

    3. Re:Testosterone levels by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The natural end result of psychopathic capitalism, https://www.anabolicmen.com/st..., the endless rabid dog, eat rabid dog (sane healthy dogs do not eat each other) stress cycle. The whole of government and society orientated to exploitation of the majority to feed the insatiable psychopathic greed of the minority, produces the stresses which cripple the long term outcome for those societies. Why they fuck would you choose to feed your children to the fires of psychopathic capitalism, just say no, seriously what do you lose, stress and worry until the day you die for children you force into a self destructive system that will endeavour to prey upon them (seriously that is the current goal, prey upon as many others as possible to be celebrated and worshipped by main stream media), this versus well, nothing but something close to living your life as an overgrown teenager until the very end, just don't 'believe' the marketing, spend big to reproduce or die 'er' 'um' forgotten (like so what and like it wont happen anyhow), no support from children (like they will even be able to afford it, no full time employment, no home ownership) or the happiness of your children (watching them die in for profit wars, see them bankrupted by health care costs and most likely living a life of poverty). Billion of years of past and billions of years of future, either life is worth more than a mud monkey experience (serving the greed of those more anti-social than your are) or why play the fucking game.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re: Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why do you think they're called *grand*fathers?

    5. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sorry your gerbil died man.

    6. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry your gerbil died man.

      Yeah, that's a real bummer. I mean, I was suspicious when they found a veteranarian who would de-claw it, under the table, for cash, off the records. Sure, I had my hesitations about that. But it seemed OK. The procedure went flawlessly, the gerbil seemed no worse for the wear. But then, the very long funnel came out. Ok, maybe that's an animal medicine tool I had never seen before, Lord knows I'm not an expert. But finally, when the gerbil was forced to crawl up your gaping asshole, I felt all the fear, apprehension, and dread I had been denying. While you squirmed in sick pleasure, I knew a furry little creature was slowly being suffocated by SHIT. That poor thing. You're a monster. A fucking monster!

    7. Re:Testosterone levels by maggotbrain_777 · · Score: 1

      Sorry that you picked up the evil Dr. Bronner's soap off of the shelf.

    8. Re:Testosterone levels by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      This went to a very dark place, fast.

    9. Re:Testosterone levels by Computershack · · Score: 2

      You are a fucking nutcase.

      There folks is the opinion of a Consumer Sucker destined to live their life perpetually in debt so they can have the life the advertisers tell them they should have so the companies can sell them ever more shit they don't need to keep the money train rolling.

      --
      I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
    10. Re:Testosterone levels by b0ndaegi · · Score: 1

      I'm with you on that one. My parents watch me struggle day to day with short term contracts, inability to buy a house, student debt, so little pension it's laughable...

      Why in fuck's name would I want that for my own kids? That's just fucking selfish. If YOU really feel concerned about the Future of the Human Species, get yourself a second hand pooper, plenty of them to go about.

      And die miserable and be forgotten? Who gives a shit, and that's why we have places like Dignitas.

      --
      b0ndaegi is g00d f0r y0u
    11. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Right on the money! ;-)

      Don't know why you're getting shit.

      But seriously, Japan just beat the rest of the world to the endgame of the current system. And hey, this isn't the first time in history where people say "fuck it," and quit. I'm right there with those evil people refusing to breed, pretty much for the reasons you put down. Once the power structures at large become visible in all walks of life, you feel the cage, and unless you can find a way to ensure security (or you are one of the few with true power/influence), children become a gamble for yours and their future.

      Does this really sound that cynical or unrealistic? I really hope every parent out their succeeds, and I do think having a family/village would be fun -- but if you have to work so much to get ahead that you can't spend time with your kids, what's the point?

    12. Re: Testosterone levels by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      luckyo, i agree, it would be nice if the general public could "concentrate" and responde to the issue. period.

    13. Re:Testosterone levels by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh for fucks sake, quit it with this nonsense. This whole "exploitation of the majority for the minority" fits any form of government. Do you think the common man lived any better under the various feudal systems that predate the modern capitalist economies? The same holds true for all of the communist systems that were tried as well, with huge disparities between the proles and the party leadership, with the only difference being that everyone was poorer. At least in western capitalist countries there's some form of social mobility where a poor immigrant like Andrew Carnegie can become wealthy and powerful. Medieval peasants didn't go around becoming lords unless they found a sword in stone.

      People are having fewer children because we're so productive and good at keeping them alive, there isn't as much incentive to spawn half a dozen or more for extra farm labor. Household productivity is likewise vastly improved to the point where women can work part or full time outside of the house without the household falling into complete disarray so most of them don't want to sit around being a baby factory either. And its a good thing as well. The world doesn't need even more people when we haven't figured out how to make sure that the ones we have are all at a reasonable baseline and not committing various atrocities towards one and other.

    14. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "He'll make an *excellent* drone." - Cmdr. Data

    15. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Red China and Russia, murderers of millions.

    16. Re:Testosterone levels by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      You nailed it.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    17. Re:Testosterone levels by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

      He is being moderated down because most people are indoctrinated to take offense at anything critical of capitalism, no matter how remote that criticism is.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    18. Re:Testosterone levels by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

      This doesn't at all surprise me. I have a stepson (for the moment) who seemed to apparently never hit puberty at all. He's nearly 30 and he has the body and manners of a prepubescent child. He did grow so he's taller but otherwise he just never seemed to grow an Adams apple or much in the way of body hair. His muscle mass never much increased and his bone structure on his face stayed child like. Eventually he went to a doctor and was told that he produced almost no testosterone at all. His decision? Become a female. Makes no sense to me because there's nothing even remotely feminine about him or his personality. Given a choice between taking testosterone (among other things) and becoming a man he opted to go through a hell of a lot more than that and be a woman.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    19. Re:Testosterone levels by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

      The best part about it is every generation that arrives at this tired ass trope thinks they uncovered the great conspiracy of our world.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    20. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is a result of the central bank reallocating purchasing power from productive capital (the source of young people's wages) into assets. As a result, young people can't earn enough money at their jobs to buy property and start a family. This is the case EVERYWHERE that CBs have adopted zero percent interest rate policy.

      This is the OPPOSITE of capitalism. More like a form of extra-psychopathic socialism or fascism. Steal from the poor to give to the rich.

    21. Re:Testosterone levels by supremebob · · Score: 1

      I look at the state where I live (Connecticut), and I see a place where all of the manufacturing and office jobs continue to disappear and keep getting replaced with low wage service jobs. We're quickly getting to a point where the only people left will be a handful of wealthy retired business owners and their families, and a bunch of poor folks offering services for these people.

      So, yeah, I'm not really interested in having a bunch of kids knowing that they will likely end up washing the dogs and manicuring the nails of millionaires.

    22. Re:Testosterone levels by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      People are having fewer children because we're so productive and good at keeping them alive, there isn't as much incentive to spawn half a dozen or more for extra farm labor.

      I suppose that having no children at all is a subset of having fewer children.

      But we are become so productive that going out of existence is the goal? I'm guessing that personal productivity is not the only reason for negative population growth.

      There are many reasons that people might decide not to have children, or even avoid entanglements with the opposite sex. Google "Dried Fish woman" and "Herbivore man", both social changes in Japan. Here's the Wikipedia pages for the herbivore men, couldn't find one for the dried fish women, probably poltically incorrect for them to have one.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      That might be the future for Western societies.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    23. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You post makes no sense to me. At first, I was like "deciding to go for Gender Reassignment Surgery just because you don't produce testosterone seems a little extreme", but reading the rest of the post, you make it sound as if not taking testosterone automatically makes him a woman in your eyes, no surgery required. Or put another way, he didn't actually decide to become a woman, he simply decided to not do something that would make him a man in your eyes. And in your eyes, if he isn't a man, he must be a woman.

      Not saying that's how you meant it, simply saying that is how it came across.

    24. Re:Testosterone levels by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

      My post is incomplete I guess. I should have elaborated and said that he's chosen to take hormones and pursue gender reassignment (the whole thing, eventually leading to surgery). It's not about "in my eyes". He's opted to try and become something he isn't that will take an enormous amount of time, money (that he doesn't have), and lengthy medical procedures instead of simply trying to get his hormones in order and continuing life as the male that he was born as (albeit one with clear deficiencies in testosterone production). I hope that makes more sense.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    25. Re:Testosterone levels by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh for fucks sake, quit it with this nonsense. This whole "exploitation of the majority for the minority" fits any form of government. Do you think the common man lived any better under the various feudal systems that predate the modern capitalist economies?

      No, but that's no reason to "quit it" with what you call "this nonsense". The simple fact is that constant vigilance is the price of freedom precisely because human nature has not changed. Things are much better for the average person today than it was then, but the way we are living now (as a species) is unsustainable and is destroying our habitat. We can't just rest on our laurels because things are better today than they were during the dark ages.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re:Testosterone levels by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      I look at the state where I live (Connecticut), and I see a place where all of the manufacturing and office jobs continue to disappear and keep getting replaced with low wage service jobs.

      You know, in the USA, you are free to move to where the jobs are......?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    27. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I volunteer to go to Japan and help with repopulation efforts.

    28. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China? India? Oh okay Mexico. That makes sense.

    29. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let them eat cake.

    30. Re:Testosterone levels by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      China? India? Oh okay Mexico. That makes sense.

      That's silly...there are plenty of jobs in the US, they just may not be located in Connecticut like the OP was talking about....

      There are jobs in the US, you just may have to move to another state to get the job and wages, and cost of living you desire.

      It is pretty simple really....you just can't be scared to move a few 100 miles or more away from mommy and daddy.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    31. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The places with jobs have outrageous housing prices, so no... most people aren't "free" to move to say NYC or SF or other similar metropolitan areas, because their housing expenses will be 5x of what they are in no-job-land... and they'd still be flipping burgers!

    32. Re:Testosterone levels by Eloking · · Score: 1

      People are having fewer children because we're so productive and good at keeping them alive, there isn't as much incentive to spawn half a dozen or more for extra farm labor. Household productivity is likewise vastly improved to the point where women can work part or full time outside of the house without the household falling into complete disarray so most of them don't want to sit around being a baby factory either. And its a good thing as well. The world doesn't need even more people when we haven't figured out how to make sure that the ones we have are all at a reasonable baseline and not committing various atrocities towards one and other.

      Honnestly, I think you forgot the most important reason : We have Birth control now

      --
      Elok
    33. Re: Testosterone levels by haliburns · · Score: 1

      Please move to Cuba

    34. Re:Testosterone levels by war4peace · · Score: 2

      "People are having fewer children"
      No, they're not. Not globally, for sure.

      Yeah, Japan, Western Europe, the US of A - also some Eastern European countries fit the profile of "diminishing population". So what? that's more than compensated by Africa, most of Asia, maybe South America (too lazy to look at the data). World's population is booming despite the reduction in western civilization countries.

      Want to stop population reduction? Carefully select and allow immigrants in, without yelling "omg they gonna steal our jobs". There, population problem solved.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    35. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Places where many people want to live costs more than places where fewer people want to live.

      Color me shocked.

    36. Re:Testosterone levels by imrahilj · · Score: 2

      If you do move far from mommy and daddy, it gets harder to have those kids from a lack of support. I know, my parents (and my in laws) live on the other side of the country. Having young children and no family support network is pretty hard.

    37. Re:Testosterone levels by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      Great point. Free money isn't actually free. Also, the big banks get away with fraud and are rewarded with bailouts instead of actually being punished. There isn't much incentive to be honest, is there?

    38. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those lean cultural. My reasoning leans legal.

      Being a husband or a father in the US means various departments and state offices (including courts) have a different set of circumstances regarding authority, access, obligation, rights, responsibility, etc etc etc, for the various possible scenarios and conditions those family titles can be or involve (yes, including divorce).

      Basically, I'm pretty sure that Future Mes from parallel universes have gone through several, many of them had their various "are you serious is that how it works this is BULLSHIT" answered with a form of "well you should have thought of that before". And so they did, by telepathically informing the subconscious in my universe to "watch the fuck out for the BULLSHIT".

      Some of them probably had very happy days. It's only fair that #notallwomen be acknowledged, for one. But the game is broken and I won't play. Not in the US anyway.

      Oh, and I suppose culturally there's plenty of reasons to say fuck the game. For instance, you can quickly find people who will blast the ancient diamond cartel on the internets, but you don't run a billion dollar gig on a conceptual product when the concept is unaccepted.

    39. Re:Testosterone levels by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      But the game is broken and I won't play. Not in the US anyway.

      Don't sell the rest of the West short. Did you know that there is a feminist ideology based snow plowing system in Sweden? https://heatst.com/world/femin... It appears that clearning the roads is pandering to the Patriarchy, and since women are more likely to walk and bicycle, (their stupid assumption) the orders came down that the roads get plowed last, the sidewalks first. Didn't work for some reason.

      One of the most amusing and stupid things about humanity is that no matter the political leaning - left or right - there are always asswipes who believe that their ideology trumps physics. Ideology only trumps intelligence.

      Meanwhile, not playing the game is a pretty good strategy.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    40. Re:Testosterone levels by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Do you think the common man lived any better under the various feudal systems that predate the modern capitalist economies?
      Back then taxes for the peasants were 30%. And the nobles quite often paid no taxes.

    41. Re:Testosterone levels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the OPPOSITE of capitalism. Steal from the poor to give to the rich.

      You have some rather unorthodox views on how capitalism works.

    42. Re:Testosterone levels by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      If you do move far from mommy and daddy, it gets harder to have those kids from a lack of support. I know, my parents (and my in laws) live on the other side of the country. Having young children and no family support network is pretty hard.

      It isn't hard and has been done for ages....

      What about the wagon trains of years past...those folks left their relatives and likely NEVER saw them again.

      My parents moved after I was born....and I grew up first half of my life not really knowing or seeing any relatives.

      While its nice to have some grandparents to unload the kids on from time to time...it isn't a necessity.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  2. Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This has really got to do with Japanese women's roles in society and opportunities.

    Japanese society says to Japanese women you can either have a child or a career . Seems Japanese woman are choosing a Career.
      The times are a changing my friend.....

    1. Re: Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe.
      Or maybe you can't actually get your pillow pregnant, no matter how hot the picture of the 10 year old girl you have printed on it is.

    2. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's true. Also, in most western countries law is very biased against men for having children. Basically, if you get a divorce, you'll loose your kid(s) and half your money plus 40%-60% income for the rest of your life. If you loose your job, there's a good chance you'll loose your drivers license, passport and end up in jail for not paying support, even if it's not possible for you to work. Why would you ever risk that?

    3. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you loose your job, there's a good chance you'll loose your drivers license,

      I hate it when I can't tighten my job and driver's license.

    4. Re: Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the masculine side of the issue. Women don't put out so the guys get hentai and sex robots.

    5. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      If you loose your job, there's a good chance you'll loose your drivers license,

      I hate it when I can't tighten my job and driver's license.

      You loosen your job to stay at home and loosen your license to walking.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    6. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      There is a tendency for the courts to favor the mother in custody rights.
      However most divorces don't go to that extreme where they choose for joint custody. Normally when it gets that bad it is because the child is under harm with the care of the individual.
      Sadly normally the father is the cause of the problem. Being that the guy is rather scummy anyways he has a hard time functioning in society. So he ends up loosing his job because he is a jerk and lazy so they fire him. Driving like a jerk so he gets into trouble where they revoke his license. And child support now takes a large percentage of his income, because he doesn't make so much.
      Unfortunately the mother needs to be really bad for custody to go to the father. So if the mom is the scummy jerk she is crying that she is the victim.

      However this is more the exception then the rule. Most devorces are about compromise and a civil distribution of the family wealth.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So woman clearly make wrong choices of fathers of their kids? But let me guess, chicks are not to be blamed for THEIR OWN ACTIONS under any circumstances.

      Gotcha.

    8. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Japanese society says to Japanese men you can either have a life or a career. Until sleeping at your desk and working until you drop dead stop being Japanese virtues, a lot of men aren't going to be available to breed.

    9. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are FORCED to choose a career because a single man's salary can't support a stay-at-home wife, much less a full family.

      This is because of central bank intervention in the economy. They drive up asset prices until no-one can afford a house or rent while causing wages to stagnate. Only the rich, who already own assets, benefit.

    10. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If you loose your job, there's a good chance you'll loose your drivers license, passport and end up in jail for not paying support, even if it's not possible for you to work. Why would you ever risk that?

      Funny how debtor's prisons have made their triumphant return. The ultimate fiscal insanity.

      But the point is well taken. Any man signing up for the modern day husband/father shitshow needs counseling.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    11. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Japan, divorce of marriage was traditionally very rare and shunned by sociatey, but on the other hand, not much regulated by law. In the recent 2 decades it became relatively more frequent and now scares ladies witless.

      Here is why: the husband / father is free to walk out, if he wants to see the kids afterwards he pays a tithe to the ex-wife / mother, but there is no legal obligation to do so if he is indifferent to his former family. That move would leave an ex-housewife in a very dire situation, as she likely has no marketable job skills and must fall back to family / relatives, which is ~ moral annihilation in Japan. The end game is ever more girls deciding to live with cats and shopping for life and never become a wife or never even become sexually active.

      On the other hand, young guys' minds are wrecked by pop culture (light novels, anime, manga) and so they end up dating hug pillows. You see, japanese entertainment projects a replaceable, plastic image of girls / ladies. On the surface they are idolized (99% of protagonists are girls in those stories) but if you check under the hood those girl characters are way too often sacrificed and considered replaceable and the guy in the story is always alleviated of keeping his strong and sincere-looking promises to her, whatever "deux ex machina" trick that takes.

      One recent and painful example is WorldEnd (commonly abbreviated to SukaSuka in japanese because of the light novel's very long formal title). It's a cliched fantasy love story set in a dire world that somehow ended up an irresistably captivating romance and about 3 pages / minutes into the novel / anime everybody started rooting for the couple, cheering them on. The story shed much of the fantasy dressing as it went on and turned into an emotional slice-of-life drama, especially in the anime adaptation.

      Eventually the 19 y.o. lad proposes to the 15 y.o. gal very firmly, but then the author slaughters Chtholly the next day like an animal and the guy fails to protect her, despite her progressing mental illness. Willem then goes on to participate in various fluff, juvenile and markedly low quality fantasy adventures and seldom thinks of her any more and even then only mundanely. Eventually the girl re-incarnates as a 4 year old and the guy is supposed to get her in the future (pedobear ouch!). Except that the author had stated and brutally shown that the girl was killed off, body and soul, so the new copy is just a farcical imitation. How can that be good enough for the guy?

      The whole scenario was nasty enough to give poor sleep and appetite for a week for the western audience, because you know proposal means they either live together or die together (i.e. Romeo and Juliet). Furthermore, persons are not considered replaceable in the graeco-roman-judeo-christian tradition.

      Anyhow, japanese teenager and young adult guys are being indoctrinated to consider girls, (manga or real) just replaceable produce, with a new sortiment coming out every year and so they shun relationships that require long term bond and attachment. Buy a new figurine and hug pillow every anime season, lathe-rinse-repeat. The result is masturbation draws their life force and they become passive, so dating and marriage happens less and less often and the island nation dies out. What in the hell if wrong with Japan?

      (Note: please don't read or watch SukaSuka, don't reward the author for being wretched and don't make yourself sick and saddened to the bones...)

    12. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      not if you marry a women who has a career.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    13. Re:Japanese women can have a child or career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I though most divorces were about anger and I'm going to make him suffer.

  3. This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you seen Tokyo's population? That city could definitely use a decrease. Who the fuck wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?

    1. Re:This is good news. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      It's not a problem when it's peaceful... but it means the death toll gets crazy high whenever a radioactive monster or space armada attacks the city.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:This is good news. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      Have you seen Tokyo's population? That city could definitely use a decrease. Who the fuck wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?

      I found it more tolerable to live close t that many people than to live close to any other people, including my own. The Japanese nature is ideally suited to living in close quarters. Even though it's not overall a crowded country - it's all small villages and unpopulated wilderness when you go out of town - they enjoy living close to each other.

    3. Re:This is good news. by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      It's not a problem when it's peaceful... but it means the death toll gets crazy high whenever a radioactive monster or space armada attacks the city.

      This is why you need to upgrade to Tokyo 3 first. Tokyo 1 and 2 just don't cut it.

    4. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Have you seen Tokyo's population? That city could definitely use a decrease. Who the fuck wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?

      I found it more tolerable to live close t that many people than to live close to any other people, including my own. The Japanese nature is ideally suited to living in close quarters. Even though it's not overall a crowded country - it's all small villages and unpopulated wilderness when you go out of town - they enjoy living close to each other.

      That's because Japanese culture, in general, understands manners and social graces. Things Americans wouldn't think twice about are major faux pas in Japanese society.

      Americans seem to think that if they are kind to a stranger, if they yield, if they voluntarily allow someone else to be first ... if they say "excuse me" and actually give the other person a second to move instead of immediately invading their personal space like it was not a polite request but a warning ... if they decide that blocking high-traffic doorways, hallways and other narrow shared public spaces might be rude ... if they show any sort of respect to another person especially one they don't know, who is not their boss in any way ... well then they lose at least ten points.

      Americans don't think of these things as common courtesy - that was a generation or two ago. Now, Americans think of these things as acts of subservience, a tacit admission that someone else is better than you. They have confused self-centeredness with individuality. So they think that "who will take your shit without serious challenge" is the real measure of self-hood and significance. Ask any American who has ever worked a job in retail. So it's no wonder that Japanese are better at living closely together with less (though certainly not zero) stress overall.

      The real issue with Americans is they're generally so very provincial. They tend not to have personally experienced foreign cultures and don't think much about multiple ways to do things. This is a major flaw because the whole American Melting Pot concept is based on conscious awareness, not mindless obedience from lack of other known options. Plenty of cultures other than the Japanese can highlight this, it's just that this one was on-topic.

    5. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Americans don't think of these things as common courtesy - that was a generation or two ago.

      While there's definitely some truth to this, a large part of it is also that Japanese tend to be much passive aggressive. So, the whole subway groping phenomenon is so pervasive that basically nothing is done about it. And those who want to raise awareness? They use kawai imagery because even anti-groping messages have to be cube.

      The real issue with Americans is they're generally so very provincial. They tend not to have personally experienced foreign cultures and don't think much about multiple ways to do things. This is a major flaw because the whole American Melting Pot concept is based on conscious awareness, not mindless obedience from lack of other known options. Plenty of cultures other than the Japanese can highlight this, it's just that this one was on-topic.

      Talk about pot calling the kettle black. Japan is massive provincial, xenophobic, sexist, and generally peaceful based upon a system of mindless obedience. The American Melting Pot concept is not base on conscious awareness as much as constant exposure which happens in cities but not most of rural America. This does not translate into wholly self-centeredness but there's definitely a lot more of it and more awareness of it in American tourists--consider how few Americans leave the country and see how much that creates a huge bias.

      In any case, the Japanese crave cities like a lot of people crave cities: it's the best place to have a sustainable career with a substantial income. It's why the East/West coasts in the US have so many people. The main difference is that in the US the vast majority of the rest of the space is wide, open space. In Japan, it's mountains. It's little wonder a greater percentage might cluster around cities that have been heavily leveled/terraced. The other major point, of course, is having 125 million people in so small a space,
        regardless.

    6. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While there's definitely some truth to this, a large part of it is also that Japanese tend to be much passive aggressive.

      That is strongly related. If decency standards don't allow people to openly go for what they want or show anger or otherwise be "not nice", passive aggressiveness is logical consequence.

    7. Re:This is good news. by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Actually the population of Tokyo(as well as surrounding prefectures such as Kanagawa and Chiba) is actually increasing, but that won't last forever, the countryside is running out of young people to send to Tokyo. Now why the Japanese government doesn't give 2 fucks about how bad the economy is outside of Tokyo is beyond me

    8. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mostly bullshit. You're making up a lot of these assertions about "Americans". Personally I've experienced the worst manners from many Europeans, and Chinese, while traveling and especially in their own countries.

      And they're "provincial" - even though more Americans travel than ever before. I think you've just decided to hitch your wagon to the anti-American left wing hate Trump crowd and wrote a pile of garbage just to make yourself feel better.

      Even though I'm originally Canadian, I have never experienced any of these things you subscribe to about my adopted countrymen. I've found the US to be one of the most generous and kind places to work and live.

      Clearly, you've never traveled much or been outside your own community.

    9. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not necessarily. That's more a consequence of decency standards and general cultural attitude being out-of-sync with each other.

    10. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      way to massively generalize you fuckstain.

    11. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great American Melting Pot: Indian Curry, Japanese Sushi, African Coffee, Latin Chimmichuri Sauce, German Sausages, French Soup, Italian Spaghetti. Put it all in a blender and mix.

      I like all of these things on their own. Turns out the homogenized slurry isn't very appealing.

    12. Re:This is good news. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Personally I've experienced the worst manners from many Europeans

      You do realize "Europeans" means nothing, right? Since you seem to want to look like a seasoned traveler.
      Various European nations (and populations within them) are very different from each other.

      Clearly, you've never traveled much or been outside your own community.

      While you seem to have done that, I doubt you have learned much.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    13. Re:This is good news. by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Have you seen Tokyo's population? That city could definitely use a decrease. Who the fuck wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?

      Civilized people. Cultured people. That's what a civilization, a civilized society is—people living in close proximity to each other. The closer you live to your neighbors, the more civilized you are, by definition.

      In the USA, the goal seems to be to live as far from your neighbors as possible, and that's kind of sad.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    14. Re:This is good news. by AmericaRunsOnDunkin · · Score: 2

      Americans seem to think that if they are kind to a stranger, if they yield, if they voluntarily allow someone else to be first ... if they say "excuse me" and actually give the other person a second to move instead of immediately invading their personal space like it was not a polite request but a warning ... if they decide that blocking high-traffic doorways, hallways and other narrow shared public spaces might be rude

      The latter condition drives the former. I used to wait politely for people to finish what they're doing and move out of the way. But they don't. They sit there in the middle of the aisle / lane, blocking traffic without a second thought while they yammer on their phone about who their cousin is dating this week. You politely ask them to move or say "Excuse me, please, may I get through?" and they glare at you like you just ran over their dog. If you're lucky, then they'll slowly amble out of the way while giving you the finger. Don't ask what happens if you're unlucky.

      So yeah, Americans are the worst. And I grew up with them. I'm always cognizant of my surroundings and not impeding others. The rude behaviors I do have are simply coping mechanisms to deal with my fellow citizens who couldn't give two shits about anyone beyond themselves.

      That said, when I travel overseas I leave all that stuff at home. No one reason to inflict it on the rest of the world. EU and Japan are a joy to visit.

      In short: people are the problem.

    15. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Various American states and regions are very different from each other, also. You would know that if you were as well traveled as you are desperately trying to imply.

      Thank you for illustrating the rude European stereotype, though.

    16. Re:This is good news. by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Three syllables:
      Hen-ta-i

    17. Re:This is good news. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      I never said one word about USA, and incidentally, I am well aware of the huge differences between states.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  4. When you live on an island by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you don't get to have lots of kids, and apparently, mot much in the way of dental care.

  5. 13.5 million people by Atmchicago · · Score: 1

    Who ... wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?

    Apparently 13.5 million people do.

    --

    You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.

    1. Re:13.5 million people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how many do, not how many want to.

      I think most humans if given a choice will chose to have space.

    2. Re: 13.5 million people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, why don't they move? The current global trend is migration into cities.

    3. Re: 13.5 million people by Bert64 · · Score: 2

      Because cities are where the jobs are. People don't want to live in cities, but most people prefer living in the outskirts of a large city and spending half their lives commuting to a job in the center than living with space in the forest.

      Given the choice, I (and many others) would choose to live in a large house in a small town or village, and have a short congestion-free journey to work or work remotely.
      If i live outside the major cities, i can afford a much larger house which includes dedicated space for home working.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    4. Re: 13.5 million people by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Japan is trying to solve this with new public transport links.

      For example, about a decade a go a new train line called the Tsukuba Express was built. It runs right into central Tokyo, partly underground and mostly elevated. When proposed it looked like a train to nowhere, but when you examined the plans you could see that they were going to build whole new towns along it too. Now it's hugely popular, people get to live outside the endless, unbroken cityscape of Tokyo and it's a huge success.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:13.5 million people by careysub · · Score: 1

      Who ... wants to live in such close proximity to that many people?

      Apparently 13.5 million people do.

      Nobody lives there anymore. Its too crowded.

      (As Yogi Berra would have said.)

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    6. Re: 13.5 million people by guyniraxn · · Score: 1

      That sounds great if you can find such an opportunity. I work for a large international high tech company that expressly forbids working from home. Sometimes managers will let it slide when roads are closed due to weather but that's rare. Every suburb I know is thoroughly congested, all those people are also trying to get to work. The only way to live somewhere without congestion is to be so far from the vast majority of jobs that all my colleagues that brag about their acreage and nature spend well over an hour driving to work and then just as much time driving home at the end of the day.

    7. Re: 13.5 million people by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      But that's not solving anything, it's just encouraging the stupidity...
      They should have encouraged companies to actually set up their businesses in those new towns, so people could live and work in the same area and not have to waste significant amounts of their time travelling in and out of tokyo.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  6. All the radiation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is killing teh sperm

  7. That's almost interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the hell happened in 1968? A record number of kaiju attacks?

    1. Re:That's almost interesting. by Cipheron · · Score: 2

      *Nothing* happened in 1968. That's when they started keeping detailed records of the population growth rate. Things were a mess in the post war years, so it took them a while to get back on track.

    2. Re:That's almost interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if they went back to the 1940s, it would really skew the statistics.

  8. A service to humanity... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are poor places where there is over population and no education. They can screen 50,000 thousand people, on yearly basis, from those countries for health, age, non-criminal history and offer them permanent citizenship. This way they can increase thier gene pool and population and uplifting world poverty.

    1. Re:A service to humanity... by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      It won't make a dent in overpopulation and it will destroy them.

      Just like in Europe.

  9. Godzilla and Mothea woke up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They were hungry...

  10. Japan will do fine by SPopulisQR · · Score: 1

    In all practical aspects, Japan does not need to worry. Japan is one of the most crowded and densely populated areas in the world. Even with their existing problems, this is an advanced economy who can pick and choose how to manage their own country. If Japan thinks that they need people, then: 1. Japanese diaspora: Japan can always invite people with Japanese background to come, to study or to live in Japan from other countries. 2. Japan can attract top scientific talents to their research institutions. There is still a lot of talents all around the world who will come if scholarships are offered. 3. North Korea. Sooner or later there will be a ton of refugees from this country. If Japan thinks that they are fine with the natural decline in population, the following will be observed: 1. Less pressure to the infrastructure 2. The average population will be richer, more educated. 3. Poverty and Crime should be reduced to zero Is there a particular reason for Japan to worry?

    1. Re:Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not having a birth rate at replacement means that the elderly will outnumber the young. When this occurs the economics behind the country's elderly support institutions will collapse (funding rates are not at 1:1 or better).

      There are other reasons flat or negative population growth are bad, but that's the main one.

    2. Re:Japan will do fine by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Robot elder care.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:Japan will do fine by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      But think of all the savings when you don't have to keep expanding your stretched infrastructure to cater to an exploding population. Seriously this is a non issue. Governments never have trouble coming up with more money, especially for such a temporary problem.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congrats to Japan in having their large population continuing to reduce. We can all learn something from this if you're any good at numbers. They will find ways to mitigate what "problems" this gives them - all probs look silly compared to fighting for food & water.

    5. Re:Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yup. People act like a decreasing population is a disaster, but the reverse true. Put bluntly there are too many people on this planet. We can either reduce our population, as Japan is doing, or suffer the consequences (see India, Africa etc). Japan is living proof that this can be done in comfortably, despite the dire warnings from economists and politicians with an investment in the perpetual growth con.

    6. Re:Japan will do fine by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      AC thats not an issue. University students will still graduate to design the exports and the robots that make the exports or become engineers, doctors or nurses.
      Age care will be a nurse, a doctor on call and many new robots. Or care at home with robot and a nurse or doctor visiting as needed.
      Beds will be made by robots, food delivered by robots, friendly robots will sit with old people and alert to any changes.
      A lot of kitchen workers, cleaners, laundry workers in shifts will just not be needed.
      Negative population growth is not bad for any normal society that can look after its own and can fund that expert care.
      A new level of population will level out and the factories, power plants, farms and hospitals will keep on working.
      Local people will find jobs, go to university or take up a trade just as past generations did.
      The best graduates will keep on working every generation, roads will be safe, power will flow. New products and services will be designed and exported to the world.
      If a factory in japan needs a lot of workers for some reason, they can send a few experts from Japan to Asia and build a factory in any part of Asia with the lowest wages and best tax rate. Raw materials will be imported as with past generations.
      The profits return to Japan and people in Japan are looked after. No big changes needed. Just good planning and a lot of experts.
      The issues the US or EU has with an influx of random people who cannot work will not happen and Japan will be totally fine.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:Japan will do fine by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1, Troll

      Put bluntly, you are a fucked-up moron.

    8. Re:Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ran this by a friend that got a masters in future studies. He agreed, a shrinking population has benefits. It's just when you have a capitalist system that can't function without demand from population growth that you have issues.

    9. Re:Japan will do fine by alantus · · Score: 1

      If by "Robot" you mean Vietnamese immigrant, then yes.

    10. Re:Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ran this by a friend that got a masters in future studies.

      The hell are they going to do before we finish the tech tree?

    11. Re: Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might be true if the Japanese weren't so racist. But they don't want foreigners to come in and boost the population numbers, like the US does to deal with its demographics issues.

    12. Re:Japan will do fine by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Yup. People act like a decreasing population is a disaster, but the reverse true. Put bluntly there are too many people on this planet

      Sustainable carrying capacity of the planet is not static.

      Single individuals in industrialized countries consume the resources of dozens of people in poor countries.

      Production, management and availability of technology and resources dominate outcomes much more so than counts of living humans.

      either reduce our population, as Japan is doing, or suffer the consequences (see India, Africa etc).

      Or you can spend 30 seconds thumbing through lists of countries by actual population density and realize the premise of this argument does not hold up.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Japan is living proof that this can be done in comfortably, despite the dire warnings from economists and politicians with an investment in the perpetual growth con.

      Japan "comfortably" has the worlds highest debt load by percentage of GDP.

    13. Re:Japan will do fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You would think, but what is really going to happen is insidious. Only religious crazies who are unable to question the world will reproduce. This means the newer generations will have a high tenancy to believe crazy shit. The population will keep getting crazier and crazier and stupider and stupider. Right now, got an education? Nope you don't get to have kids.

    14. Re:Japan will do fine by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Like Resyone, a humanoid robot called Robobear, could also eliminate the need for multiple caregivers by helping transfer seniors from the bed to a wheelchair. The nursing robot, which is still in the experimental phase and was designed by engineers from Japan's research institution RIKEN, is capable of lifting people.

      Sales of robots designed specifically to assist elderly people are expected to reach 12,400 units between 2015 and 2018, with that number expected to "increase substantially" over the next 20 years, according to the Merrill Lynch report.

      And it goes beyond personal care robots too. Robot cats are currently being sold to keep seniors company.

      http://www.businessinsider.com...

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  11. Re:Occupied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool,story, bro.

  12. Re:Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by Cipheron · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sorry to blow your mind, but the USA is BEHIND Japan on penis size:
    https://www.pri.org/stories/20...

  13. Exactly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's not like Tokyo is going "holy shit 13 million people is not enough! More births please!"

  14. Re:Occupied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a direct result of the western occupation of Japan.

    Japanese people are probably the most meticulously bred humans by far. They simply cannot tolerate the western influencing squeezing the country for all it's worth due to their genetics.

    The only real value Japan offers is it's people. Which is what the west set out to conquer them for....

    What?

  15. Gravity Is A Harsh Mistress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Japan's Population Falls At Fastest Rate Since 1968"

    Faster than 9.8 m/s^2 ?

    1. Re:Gravity Is A Harsh Mistress by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Never underestimate Godzilla.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  16. Good for them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Keeping the population under control along with the immigration. What's not to like? Maybe they won't have to pay those gentlemen to stuff the riders into the subways anymore.

  17. Re:Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh huh...

    The survey was conducted by a Japanese company. It is a bit peculiar that the Japanese came out of it significantly better than in the “Penis Size World Wide” website. There, Japan only averaged 10.92 cm (4.3”).
    The results are based on self-measurement. Even though the measurements are used to make custom-made masturbators and we can assume it’s in the men’s best interest to be as precise as possible, I imagine men are more likely to unconsciously add a few centimeters, rather than deduct a few. Or maybe American men are just more honest with regard to their wieners? Then again, any Weiner reference probably won’t make my case stronger at this point.
    The survey was only conducted among the 40 countries where Tenga sells its products. Once African and South American men develop an appetite for meticulously manufactured self-pleasuring tools, it might be a whole different ball game.

    Nice try, micropeen boy.

  18. You realize people die, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old people are known for dying. The problem will literally die out.

    1. Re: You realize people die, right? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Old people are known for dying - but older and older as technology improves. It's not at all a problem that will literally die out, as in the next 20 years we are probably looking at a 2x life extension for anyone under 60 today.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    2. Re: You realize people die, right? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      The old people will die off. Problem solved.

      If they don't, then clearly the economy, infrastructure, etc. is there to support them at the same (or higher) ratio as before. So what's the problem?

      We need fewer people on this planet. We're well over 7 billion now. Even 1 billion would be sustainable and very resilient.

  19. Re: Occupied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah yes, 'occupy.' The almost completely forgotten, stationary 'movement' that resembled nothing so much as a distributed Woodstock for the mentally ill.

  20. Re:Occupied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which is what the west set out to conquer them for.

    Er, you might want to do a little research on planes, Hawaii, and god-emperors to realign your sense of reality to reality.

  21. Uh, fastest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Faster than August 1945?

    1. Re:Uh, fastest? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Have you always been an illiterate moron, or is this a result of the regular beatings your mother gives you for being fucked up?

    2. Re:Uh, fastest? by nnet · · Score: 1

      plz2lrn2humorkthx. the world has enough hate.

  22. The US may be headed this way too by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a father of 2 kids, I've performed my evolutionary duty. :-) However, there are plenty of younger people in the US who aren't, and in my opinion they're being somewhat rational. Having kids is a big risk unless you just don't give a crap -- they cost a lot of money and you have to be much more careful about maintaining your income and savings than if you were on your own. Millenials are also skipping traditional adult rites of passage like marriage, house-buying, etc. that lay the groundwork for a family. Plus, those that do have kids are having fewer, later. Generally, people are less religious, have heard of birth control, and are less worried about child mortality, therefore less inclined to have "spare" children.

    Japan has a few things that are really slowing their birthrate - almost zero permanent immigration, a very slow economy for the last 20 years, a traditional society that says women can have either children or a career but not both, and a reputation for a workaholic culture. People are just so busy spending their lives at work so they can keep their jobs that having a family comes second. This is a big reversal from the 1980s/1990s...I remember growing up hearing that Japan was taking over the world. MBA programs were toying with the idea of making Japanese language study a requirement if I remember correctly. This is similar to what China is doing now, but China has the population to sustain it in my opinion.

    We in the US could be headed down this road too. Imagine if we close the borders and enter a period of economic stagnation. Couple this with the trend towards unstable employment, the gig economy, etc. Back in the 50s/60s, a man could count on being employed for life by a large US company and would take on the risk of a family, kids, house, car, etc. Now (IMO) we've let the pendulum swing too far back in favor of employers and removed any loyalty/stability either side had to the other. Hopefully people will realize that they want stability again once this Second Dotcom Bubble bursts and takes many of the sharing economy employers with it.

    1. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Replacement level is actually 2.1 children per couple...so I'm afraid you fell short.

    2. Re:The US may be headed this way too by quenda · · Score: 1

      Unlike Japan, the US is not severely overpopulated.
      You folks have plenty of room to move, while Japanese people are crowded into small amounts of useful land between mountains, which they have been known to level to get new land. Japanese population decline is no tragedy. They can afford to import guest labour in future if needed to care for the elderly.

    3. Re:The US may be headed this way too by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      Millenials are also skipping traditional adult rites of passage like marriage, house-buying, etc.

      Buying a house is a problem because housing prices have risen too much. "Settling down" (getting married and such) is a lot harder if you don't have a house. When you have a house, you can start getting things you like and have places to put them. If you're planning on moving too much, acquiring assets is a net negative because you have to move them.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:The US may be headed this way too by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Unlike Japan, the US is not severely overpopulated.

      Japan is not overpopulated. They've made the decision (collectively) to move everyone into cities. The Tokyo-Hiroshima region has a lot of people, but the rest is full of open space.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Millenials aren't skipping homebuying because they don't care; they're skipping homebuying because they have to choose between living where they want and a house.

    6. Re:The US may be headed this way too by quenda · · Score: 1

      Going into google maps/earth, I see a country covered in mountains, with villages and intensive farming crowded into every crevice between the mountains.
      My Australia is said to be the second-most urbanised country after Japan, but our cities more resemble Los Angeles than Tokyo. ie sprawl.

    7. Re:The US may be headed this way too by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Unlike Japan, the US is not severely overpopulated.

      That's not relevant to the problem of an ageing society.

    8. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Xest · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only reason it's even a problem is because most Western economies are built on the next generation funding the increasingly extravagant lifestyles of the last.

      So when problems like this attempt to be tackled, by say, cutting the amount of free shit old people get (i.e. by removing free bus passes, and TV licenses as well as a couple of hundred quid free money for heating from millionaire pensioners) we get absurd arguments like "I paid for it", but given that there's no money to fund it that's evidence enough that they have not in fact paid for it.

      Reduction in population is probably a good thing overall, it reduces pressure on the planet's resources, it reduces competition for wealth and resources reducing conflict, and it it generally just creates greater sustainability - we don't need to build as much, we don't need to harvest as much, and in an increasingly roboticised nation like Japan the loss of labour needn't be a problem.

      But economies have to change to cater to shrinking populations, and that means older generations getting what they actually paid for, rather than expecting the next generation to pay for what they think the world owes them, which is politically difficult given that those generations are typically most likely to vote because when you're sat around with nothing to do all day you have ample time to do so.

    9. Re:The US may be headed this way too by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Bingo. The main problem in Japan is that having children is unattractive. It's extremely expensive, often living space is limited, and it can really damage the mother's career.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      we get absurd arguments like "I paid for it", but given that there's no money to fund it that's evidence enough that they have not in fact paid for it.

      Not necessarily. Some times it's that the politicians use the money for other crap.

      My grandfather had a retirement saving account. At some point the government realized that there were lots of money in those retirement savings accounts, so they socialized the pension system, moving all that money into the state budget. They then went on to spend the money, and instead used the money from the next generation to pay back the previous generation.

      Now we also have shrinking generations (though not as much as Japan), and suddenly people have to have their own private retirement savings, because when the next generation is smaller than the previous, the government can't afford to pay back the money it already took.

      Of course when they socialized the retirement savings, the payments became taxes, and now that we have to go back to private retirement savings, we are not getting those taxes back, because they still need to pay back the previous generation. So in reality we are paying twice.

    11. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reduction in population is good very long term I think. The problem is the transition, as birth rates fall from high to low, you end up with the demographic bulge we have throughout the developed economies. As the bulge population gets elderly, the become economic drags, with more and more resources and young people required to look after them. Once the birthrate is fairly stable (say 1.8 birthrate for every 2 adults) for several generations and the elderly have died off then yes there will be a stable but probably slowly contracting economy as the population decreases. And I think this really should be the long term goal for the planet as a whole. But this process will probably involve a baby boom, large working population, then large elderly population demographic transition to have happened in all significant countries and regions.

      China is in the large working population phase, but will hit the same demographic issue Japan has. Most countries in Asia are somewhere along in the process, India who is just finishing with their baby boom phase about now. Really the only large population and region that isn't somewhere along this demographic and economic trajectory is Africa. And China is investing in Africa now, really to solve it's own upcoming baby boomer problem.

      The American and European solution to the elderly bulge has been globalisation and immigration to varying degrees. Off shore low level manufacturing and support jobs but try and keep the profits is the favourite corporate American solution, and fill jobs that can't be off shored by immigration from high birthrate countries which has been the more favoured solution in Europe. But both regions use a combination of both.

      Japan has been resistant to both solutions especially the immigration route, and so they have been going over the demographic cliff economically, a large population of elderly people that are not able to contribute to the economy, and require resources tied up in their ongoing care. In the 70's and 80's it was completely the other way around, with the large working age population in japan compared to children and elderly to look after allowing them to have a booming economy, unfortunately those workers are now the elderly.

    12. Re:The US may be headed this way too by r0kk3rz · · Score: 1

      Almost all western nations face the same fate, in response Denmark started placing adverts to try and encourage people to have more children, and oddly enough it actually appears to have worked.

    13. Re:The US may be headed this way too by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's mostly the baby boomer generation at fault here. They were exceptionally irresponsible, financially, socially and with the environment. And they have a massive sense of entitlement, especially to property and the wealth it represents. They think they did well because they are worth half a million quid, even though most of that is tied up in the house that younger people could never afford now.

      When you point out things like the environmental damage that we are now having to pay to fix, they say "it was worth it". Yeah, for them maybe...

      Once the tipping point where gen X and younger outnumber the boomers and older, there is going to be a bit of a revolution. Nothing too dramatic, just democracy at work, but those entitled asshats have set themselves up for a pretty hard fall.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an average that accounts for premature death, hence the 0.1. If his children live up to reproduce he indeed did his part. Except in the sense that averages without context are meaningless.

      This number also assumes a ratio of 50-50% of boys and girls being born. If that is for some reason skewed, think of China forced abortions or whatever, it would have to be adapted. Putin asked for Russians to consider a family of three while other countries try to bribe people with money. I think "be fruitful, and multiply" has wisdom in it, specially because so many couples won't conceive easily and if they postpone it too much they just might not have children at all, maths be damned.

      captcha: promise

    15. Re:The US may be headed this way too by invid · · Score: 0

      Only people who want babies are having babies. Think about it. All the people who don't want babies are being bred out of society. You have to really want babies to have them these days, and if any of that baby crazy is genetic, in a few generations we are going to have a world of people who compulsively baby-talk to anything with a disproportionately large head.

      --
      The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
    16. Re:The US may be headed this way too by nnet · · Score: 1

      Which people "want stability again"? I'm genuinely curious. I've always wanted it. I'm willing to bet the majority of adults also do.

    17. Re:The US may be headed this way too by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Japan is not overpopulated

      Japan imports approximately sixty percent of its food and around eighty percent of its energy (in the form of fuels.) By my definition, if a nation can't feed itself, including energy consumption, it's overpopulated. You can make up your own definitions if you like, though. M-W defines it as "the condition of having a population so dense as to cause environmental deterioration, an impaired quality of life, or a population crash". Japan mostly externalizes its environmental deterioration; Japan itself is something of a theme park, with permission needed to make even slight changes, but they're happy to fund environmental devastation in other countries. For example, they're happy to buy our redwood trees, but just try cutting down one of their maples. And then there's the whaling. Did I mention that their suicide rate, even though grossly underreported, is one of the highest among industrialized nations?

      Now granted, the USA is also unsustainable and has a lot to change, but we do have enough food and energy to run our own ship. Overpopulation is not our problem. But we're talking about Japan right now, and by any reasonable measure, it is overpopulated.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:The US may be headed this way too by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      I think it is pretty simple. Most developed countries have declining birth rates to the point of population decline, this is for a variety of reasons, many of which you mention. Japan might be slightly worse for a few cultural reasons, but not by much likely. However most developed countries augment their population loss with immigration, typically from less developed countries which have less of those factors and thus a higher birthrate. As someone mentioned in a post Japan culturally is also pretty xenophobic to the point of racism. This likely discourages a lot of immigration, and those that do, perhaps do not ever really feel welcome and eventually leave. That likely has a much bigger impact on their population than anything else. That is a tough trait to overcome if its been ingrained for so long.

      On the other comment of China, they have their own challenges. They are also getting very top heavy on the demographic chart, which will hit a tipping point sometime. Additionally their whole 1 child policy from years ago, and the preference for boys during that period of time, skews the middle of their demographic chart insofar as genders go, which is going to also have an impact on their future (i.e. number of couples and births). While on one side their population is so large that it sort of has it's own momentum, however being so massive also magnifies many of their challenges. Anyway it will be interesting to see what happens over the next 20 years and how China manages it. On the plus side (sort of) being a centralized government that isn't really democratic they are able to institute large policy programs to attempt to resolve their issues that would be impossible to implement in other countries. That said, like the afore mentioned 1 child policy the future ramifications might not be fully understood until much later...

    19. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Really, honestly, house prices haven't risen that much in certain areas of the country, at least not compared to wages. What has changed is that the more affordable houses are in areas no one wants to live in.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    20. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Once the tipping point where gen X and younger outnumber the boomers and older, there is going to be a bit of a revolution. Nothing too dramatic, just democracy at work, but those entitled asshats have set themselves up for a pretty hard fall.

      Except by then all gen Xers will be on the same entitlement programs that you'd have to cut. Then again, they're already cut for gen Xers, by virtue of being delayed. The only thing I see making a difference will be the forced austerity when the receipts and bank are less than the obligations. I fully expect to get shafted again by the goal posts moving to 70 before I get there. Then again, I've made plans that don't include any government stipend for retirement. My main worry is that medicare/medicaid will be altered enough to punish me for being foresighted.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    21. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > ...most Western economies are built on the next generation funding the increasingly extravagant lifestyles of the last.

      Incorrect. Bitter much?

      Look, the 'last generation' built your roads, fancy & reliable infrastructure, bridges, water sanitation plants, etc. You know that generation could have left it all undeveloped but saved their money in a mattress for you. So that in turn, YOU could build the same things for your children, etc. Of course you may not have children due to still being on a mountain top cave, because there was no bridge to cross the river.

    22. Re:The US may be headed this way too by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      millennials make 65% of gen X (inflation adjusted person in their 20s today vs someone in their 20s 30 years ago).

      they also were told to expect a comfortable modern life. That's what they're doing.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    23. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My main worry is that medicare/medicaid will be altered enough to punish me for being foresighted.
      Yeah, if you have money, they don't give you any. The more you have, the less they help you out. Foresight is always being punished.

    24. Re:The US may be headed this way too by careysub · · Score: 1

      Unlike Japan, the US is not severely overpopulated.

      Japan is not overpopulated. They've made the decision (collectively) to move everyone into cities. The Tokyo-Hiroshima region has a lot of people, but the rest is full of open space.

      Well, Tokyo and Hiroshima on different islands, so I am not sure what the "Tokyo-Hiroshima region" would be other than "Japan" perhaps.

      But I suspect you meant Tokyo-Yokohama, and yes the Greater Tokyo area (basically the whole Kanto Plain) has a population of 38 million, or 30% of the entire country. Now if you through in Keihanshin down the coast (the Osaka-Kyoto Metropolitan Area) with 19.4 million, then these two megalopoli have almost 50% of Japans population.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    25. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      With Medicare specifically the issue is that health insurance costs will skyrocket over what anyone planned on, especially with the republicans attempting to almost double the cost for seniors. Note that only has effect until you're 65, as of today. If you have to plan on spending an additional 30K a year pre-tax on health insurance when they push that age upwards (and you know that's coming) I'd definitely call that punishment.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    26. Re:The US may be headed this way too by strikethree · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The only reason it's even a problem is because most Western economies are built on the next generation funding the increasingly extravagant lifestyles of the last.

      I am going to need you to define this because I am not understanding it. Are you saying that my parents are increasing the extravagance of their lifestyle at my expense or that I am increasing the extravagance of my lifestyle at my children's expense? Or both?

      Or, are you just spewing garbage because your mind has been conditioned to believe certain fantasies?

      So when problems like this attempt to be tackled, by say, cutting the amount of free shit old people get ...

      So are you saying the my parents did not pay into Social Security or that I am not paying into Social Security or what? Neither myself, my parents, nor my children are receiving anything for free. There are no other generations alive right now so what you are saying should be applicable to one of those generations.

      we get absurd arguments like "I paid for it", but given that there's no money to fund it that's evidence enough that they have not in fact paid for it.

      Aha! You assume that missing money implies that something wasn't paid for. How cute. I am guessing you have never heard of fraud or theft or any of that. Think about it for a second: A person knows they paid for something. They receive that thing. The person providing that thing claims it was not paid for by the first part and must be paid for by the third party. Hm... Yep! The proper conclusion is that the first person never paid for it. Solid reasoning there buddy.

      But economies have to change to cater to shrinking populations, and that means older generations getting what they actually paid for, rather than expecting the next generation to pay for what they think the world owes them, which is politically difficult given that those generations are typically most likely to vote because when you're sat around with nothing to do all day you have ample time to do so.

      Blah Blah Blah Blah. Your words make no sense since they were founded upon ideas that are not true. Keep fighting the good fight my man. Don't let those elderly people rip you off.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    27. Re:The US may be headed this way too by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Well, Tokyo and Hiroshima on different islands,

      No they aren't lol, look at a map.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    28. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree it's the baby boomer generation, along with all of the generations before it and after it.

    29. Re:The US may be headed this way too by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Japan imports approximately sixty percent of its food

      America imports a lot of food too. Have you ever eaten a banana? Japan is capable of feeding itself with locally grown food, but the diet will not be so varied (they will have to eat rice, fish, and vegetables).

      if a nation can't feed itself, including energy consumption, it's overpopulated.

      Oh, so by your definition, America is overpopulated, too. Carry on.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    30. Re:The US may be headed this way too by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      What has changed is that the more affordable houses are in areas no one wants to live in.

      Yeah, that is by far the biggest problem, and also one that is fairly easy to solve with a bit of political will.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    31. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >built themselves roads, infrastructure, bridges
      ftfy
      same shit happening now
      get over yourself

    32. Re:The US may be headed this way too by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, so by your definition, America is overpopulated, too. Carry on.

      We are not dependent on foreign oil. We are choosing to burn foreign oil for probably a number of geopolitical reasons, plus the usual kickbacks etc.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    33. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abstaining from breeding is the evolutionary duty of the bottom 80% of participants.

      Otherwise evolution doesn't actually happen.

    34. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't caused by overpopulation. it's directly related to women entering the workforce and having to chose between starting a family or working in an environment with insufficient benefits to do both.

    35. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > cutting the amount of free shit old people get (i.e. by removing free bus passes, and TV licenses as well as a couple of hundred quid free money for heating from millionaire pensioners) we get absurd arguments like "I paid for it", ....

      Yeah, but we also get more sensible arguments, like "it costs a fortune to means-test things - new systems, verification, enforcement, fixing fairness loopholes" and "when you means-test benefits, a lot of the people who are really poor and a bit incompetent stop filling in the forms, and fall out the system". And a lot of elderly people are pretty incompetent at dealing with stuff like this, and if they really need the heating and don't get it, they die in press-friendly ways.

      There aren't so many millionaire pensioners that it makes much difference; means-testing pensioner benefits would probably save some money, but not much compared to the costs, and it would create a another huge new edifice of bureaucracy. Maybe best to just ... let them have the benefits?

    36. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you don't understand, there's no need to get snobbish. maybe you're just not that bright.

      this idea about next generation paying for the extravagant lifestyles of the past may be a reference to debt. another poster mentioned building road and bridges and whatnot. and with whose money?

      here's a clue: not their own. it's all debt funded. the whole idea of debt is buying something now that you cannot afford, and paying back in installments. often times these debts are extended and rolled over into future generations, so it becomes the next generations problems. perhaps you've heard of the phrase 'kicking the can down the road'?

      with debt, future generations are paying for past expenditures. happens every day.

    37. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      especially if she works as a go-go dancer

    38. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hiroshima and Tokyo are both on Honshyu. Not sure what you mean by different islands. Both cities have outlying islands, but I don't think you meant those, either.

      The original phrasing is odd, but I can sort of imagine the intended southern coast range from Kanto past Kansai, which you indicated encompasses a large chunk of the population.

    39. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who would want to reproduce with the help of the fairly recent crop of women? Not interested in tramp stamp wearing chuckleheads and their warped views on life.

    40. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aha! You assume that missing money implies that something wasn't paid for. How cute. I am guessing you have never heard of fraud or theft or any of that. Think about it for a second: A person knows they paid for something. They receive that thing. The person providing that thing claims it was not paid for by the first part and must be paid for by the third party. Hm... Yep! The proper conclusion is that the first person never paid for it. Solid reasoning there buddy.

      They paid the money, then voted in people who mismanaged it.

    41. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm curious what is your definition to "open space". You could give some number of density... otherwise it is just a feeling. Most of Japan(80-90%) has population density of >100 people/km2. 100people/km2 is A VERY HIGH DENSITY EVERYWHERE, so Japan probably have 99% of high density already. Japan would be fine with 20-40 million people that would allow to support itself by agriculture(even with growing food in skyscrapes), without importing food. IMHO, japan has excess of ~100 million people already.
      Keep in mind - Japan can't sustain itself according to liberal world model from sun and wind energy... With population it has right now, it has to import most of energy from somewhere else and it is one of the top importer of oil in the world - because there is a lots of people there.

      Anyway - if we have to compare US, with population density that is in Japan, US should have population of 3 billion(!) people. Must be lonely to live in US...

    42. Re:The US may be headed this way too by Xest · · Score: 1

      The numbers don't lie, and the fact is that each generation is wealthier than the last in just about every Western country. In the UK it's now come to a head where millennials (I'm not a millenial fwiw, I'm gen X) are now the first generation that does less well than the generation before them.

      We have this problem for example in the UK of a housing shortage such that younger people are having to increasingly rent, rather than buy, and the problem is then exacerbated because the only generation with the wealth to buy are the baby boomers, who then buy to rent, increasing their wealth, allowing them to buy more to rent, and then reducing the housing stock even more.

      So you can say I'm conditioned to believe fantasies and spewing garbage sure, but the problem is, that reality backs up my point, regardless of how inconvenient you may wish to find it. There's simply no dispute that in the vast majority of Western countries each successive elderly generation has gotten wealthier and wealthier, but that because of the financial crisis there are now also in many countries generations that are now going to be the first to not enjoy that same benefit because the debt accumulated by the older generations who have not paid for what they've voted to give themselves simply wasn't paid for by themselves.

      "Aha! You assume that missing money implies that something wasn't paid for. How cute. I am guessing you have never heard of fraud or theft or any of that."

      Again, you've come up with something that sounds like a good argument in your head, but it's not backed up by reality because fraud and corruption have been decreasing in most Western nations.

      So great, you've convinced yourself that it's fine to screw the younger generations, but nothing you've said actually proves that it's okay in the way you're arguing it is, and it can't, because there's nothing to disprove in what I said as everything I said is backed up by the stats. Effectively, what you've said in an awful lot of words is "I'm part of the problem and I don't care.".

    43. Re:The US may be headed this way too by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I'm curious. How do we solve this problem with a bit of political will? Round up undesirables and force them to live in rural Nebraska?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    44. Re:The US may be headed this way too by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's mainly a matter of building more houses. "Everywhere you go in America, people don't want any new construction, they don't want anything to change." -Sun Tzu We're kind of irrational that way.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    45. Re:The US may be headed this way too by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The baby boom generation is a problem only by its great size. The environment is far better than when my generation first got a chance to control it. I don't know what you mean by socially irresponsible, but crime rates have fallen during its dominance. The boomers took advantage of the financial opportunities they got, just like other generations.

      The financial problem is the divorce of productivity and pay starting roughly around 1980. Reagan's big appeal was to people over 30 by then, which means people born in 1950 or earlier. Supply-side or trickle-down economics were primarily the result of the "Greatest Generation".

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  23. Quick! Make them take in Middle Eastern migrants! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    And don't compel them to assimilate or work! That'll take care of Japans problems!

  24. Outcome Of WWII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real effect on the Japanese population by WWII was at first to kill off nearly all Alpha males. That left the remaining population with queers, gays and lesbians and a very few reproducing males and females.

    In 2017, the population is mostly queers, gays and lesbians; i.e. the Walking Dead!

  25. I have 5 children by FeelGood314 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you want to have a replacement rate of 2.3 children per woman some women will need to have at least 3 kids. I'm lucky, my ex and I had excellent educations and very good jobs. However in Canada having more than 2 kids is in many ways an exception and there are lots of little things that are surprisingly biased against families larger than 4. I've seen in some cities that are more dog friendly than kid friendly and when they do have facilities or policies for small children it is for one child. So if most western countries require a woman to start a career before having children then the number of women having them will go down, if women are discourage from having their first child until after 30 it gets worse and if you make it difficult or almost weird for women to have more than 1 or 2 children then it's pretty much mathematically impossible to maintain a population without large amounts of immigration.

    Also at some point our health care system started spending the majority of its money on people in their last 18 months of life. There are a lot of other wealth transfers from the young to older generations, house prices, government debt... There is likely some tipping point were the share of the economy that is given to 18 - 30 year olds becomes so small that they don't feel secure enough to start a family. My suspicion is that most western countries crossed that point a while ago.

    1. Re: I have 5 children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just curious, you know the replacement rate is 2 yet went and had more than double the replacement rate. Why?

    2. Re: I have 5 children by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      The replacement rate is higher than 2. This because a minority of people die prematurely before being able to reproduce (or reproduce as much as they otherwise would have). This means that in Western countries the replacement rate is about 2.1. Obviously it's higher in developing countries. Worldwide, the average replacement rate is 2.3.

    3. Re:I have 5 children by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Problem is you will always get the rationalists bleating on about how having a womb makes women worth less than men to an employer, and how children are a lifestyle choice, and why should they pay to school other people's offspring... While also complaining about immigration.

      It won't be until it's far too late that they realize there are not enough young people around and they personally are fucked by it. It takes 25+ years to make a doctor, minimum.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re: I have 5 children by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Parenting is a complex decision based on logic, love, and reptilian need (did a neanderthal ever say "i need to get humping, replacement rate and all that"). You're basically asking "i can only view this complex decision along these lines... please explain your reasoning"... I think this is a "if you need to ask you might not understand the answer" question.

    5. Re:I have 5 children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is you will always get the rationalists bleating on

      Ahh, now I finally understand AmiMoJo. Being rational is a negative in your opinion. Now all your crazy views, refusal to use sources under most circumstances and never engaging in meaningful dialog all makes sense.

      In AmiMoJo's world logic is just a nuisance that only trolls bother with.

    6. Re:I have 5 children by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Also at some point our health care system started spending the majority of its money on people in their last 18 months of life.

      That point was in the 50s after some people realized that there was a "baby boom". Well, the costs did not go up then, they have been steadily climbing since the 50s. Some extraordinarily bright (and evil) bulbs realized there would be a fortune to be made when those children grew old. You can either die or pay for health care. A captive audience so to speak. Laws were being proposed back then to create what we have now: An absurdly expensive medical system designed to extract as much of the wealth of the population as possible.

      There are a lot of other wealth transfers from the young to older generations, house prices, government debt...

      I find it odd that you assume the "older" generation is the recipient of these funds. Every person older than me seems to be losing money at an insanely fast rate. Let me rephrase that, the general population seems to be losing money at an insanely fast rate.

      But, just like partisan politics: Divide and conquer.

      Go ahead and yank all those "freebies" the older generations are getting. I am going to laugh like hell when you finally realize, at the end of your life when you are helpless, suffering, and poor that things are not what they appear to be.

      Just to let you know ahead of time, suffering sucks and encouraging the creation of more suffering for other people because you are suffering is not a very nice (or smart!) thing to do.

      Tl;DR you are suffering now because a group of people realized that health care is a captive audience and that there was an abnormal bulge in demographics which allowed a wealth transfer to be planned 50+ years in advance.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    7. Re:I have 5 children by gnunick · · Score: 1

      Replying to un-do my accidental down-mod. Sorry, I meant to mod 'Insightful'

      --
      I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
    8. Re:I have 5 children by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks, appreciated.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:I have 5 children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, notice the wording: [the] problem is you will always get the rationalists

      The problem isn't that people use rationality and reason. The problem is that such people will exist. Their mere existence is a problem. The mere existence of logical thought (contrary to his own) is the problem.

      He's not saying logic is for trolls. He's saying it's for thought criminals.

    10. Re:I have 5 children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, let me mod the comment for you.

    11. Re:I have 5 children by ZorroXXX · · Score: 2

      Problem is you will always get the rationalists bleating on

      Ahh, now I finally understand AmiMoJo. Being rational is a negative in your opinion.

      It seems to me that you are either intentionally misunderstanding or actually do not (want to) understand. Let's face it: all people are both rational and irrational. I am, you are, AmiMoJo is, everybody is. For instance, the rational thing is to treat one's body well and both eat healthy and exercise enough. Yet most people do not do that. Because for whatever "irrational" reason people choose not to. My understanding of AmiMoJo's complaints about rationalists is about people for instance claiming that eating healthy and exercising is just a rational choice.

      Or, to address the giant irrationalism elephant in the room: humans have an extremely irrational relation to fear. I do, you do, everyone does. Example: when you ask people what they fear most in their life, death comes on second place! Think about that for a moment, what could possibly be worse than that? Well, guess what, the answer is public speaking. Is that a rational rank? And people spend an irrational amount of effort worrying over things that never will happen. Some people fear flying, even though that is actually one of the safest modes of travel and the rational thing would be to rather fear getting to and from the airport which is magnitudes more dangerous. If someone claims that people fearing flying should just be rational about it, that is a problem. Are you such a person?

      --
      When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
  26. Re:Occupied by Zemran · · Score: 2

    Maybe if we started respecting and encouraging other people's culture rather than always invading and destroying they would flourish. Our arrogance is totally destructive.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  27. They are preparing for a robot future by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Japan is thinking hard about the future. If robots are indeed going to take all the jobs within 20 years then all kids born now will have no jobs when they graduate. Japan will be prepared.

  28. Re: Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    4.3" is the Japanese average? Yeesh. I need to move to Japan, I'd clean house there.

  29. Japan doesn't care by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 1

    It's really only the big end of town that worries about population decline.

    Japan is horribly expensive to live in, and the Japanese would rather have a smaller population that let hordes of foreigners in.
    The youth growing up can't afford to own their own home of any decent size, and so they've given up on home ownership and spend all their money on frivolous things. Having a family is not on anyone's bucket list, and abortion is rife.

      Japan was ahead of the curve until the west finally caught up.

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
    1. Re:Japan doesn't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Japan is horribly expensive to live in

      Not really. One of the upsides of 20+ years of economic stagnation is that most of the developed world has caught up and passed Japan in cost of living.

    2. Re:Japan doesn't care by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Watch videos on YouTube about renting a (minuscule) apartment in Japan. It's insane.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re: Japan doesn't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've lived in central Tokyo for more than a decade. Apartments here are much cheaper here than London, SF, New York, Sydney, etc. Food is generally cheaper, transport is cheaper, clothes are cheaper, everything is higher quality.

    4. Re: Japan doesn't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also Japan is much more than just Tokyo, you can move out to smaller cities like Osaka, just ready yourself for surprisingly racist attitudes and never being able to own property

  30. Re: Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've had sex with a couple Japanese guys and I was very pleasantly surprised. When in Tokyo, I was also quite surprised by average height walking around town, I expected to be tall at 5'9" (around average in the US) but not so much.

  31. Re:Occupied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Because the Rape of Nanking was such a respectable display of humility and positive culture.

    Please tell me liberal academia isn't churning out people with this degree of self-loathing and gullible stupidity.

  32. Re: Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are you? 4.5"?

  33. Robots! by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Not sure how yet, but somehow robots will be involved in the solution.

    1. Re:Robots! by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Onegaishimasu!

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Robots! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gesundheit. See a doctor about that, its curable now.

  34. Not to worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both China and India have well over 1.3 billion people each.

    I'm sure they'll more than make up for any shortfall in the Japanese contribution to the global population.

    1. Re:Not to worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China is about 20 years behind Japan demographically tho. Japans population peeked in 2008. China's population will peek in 2030.

  35. USA is provincial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You do realize Japan is quite xenophobic?

    1. Re:USA is provincial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've taken holidays in the US and Japan, and the people of Japan were WAY friendlier.

      As a society, Japan is definitely xenophobic, but on an person-to-person basis, the Japanese are polite, friendly and respectful towards foreigners. That was my experience, anyway.

  36. A Failed System by rossz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You spend your entire school life studying your ass off. You aren't supposed to do much outside of school except study. Having a relationship is discouraged to the extreme.

    Then you get a job where you work 12 to 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. You have no time to actually meet someone so the odds of having a relationship are slim. Added bonus. Your boss will treat you like shit. Everything you do will be criticized. I guess it's some mistaken belief that you'll work even harder.

    On the unlikely event you find and marry someone at work, she has to quit her job and have babies. You get to keep working 12 to 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. So if, by some miracle, you have children, you'll never see them.

    No wonder young people are rejecting the entire social system and hiding from the world or committing suicide.

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
    1. Re:A Failed System by bluegutang · · Score: 4, Informative

      You must know that it's not typical for people to work 12 to 16 hours a day, 7 days a week...

    2. Re:A Failed System by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      All we need is hard work myth.
      Success comes from hard work, but it also comes from being smart, creative, efficient, lucky and knowing the right people.
      America and Asia are stuck on the Hard Work = success and failure means you didn't work hard enough.
      Our value as a human being isn't based on how much money we have or what we do. Just because we are willing to do a job that is hard to fill.
      Our value is based on how we handle our lives.
      If you are working flipping burgers. You probably made dozens of people happy that day if you did your job right. As they wanted a burger and was satisfied by it.
      If you are on tech support and helped someone solve a problem they are very happy and you may have turned they day around.
      Work shouldn't define you, but you should define your work.

      Which leads to Japan's problem and the US problem if we stop emigration. They are so defined on what they do for work they are going to overlook someone who they are willing to fall in love with, because they just don't do the same thing or their job isn't good enough.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:A Failed System by Yosho · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's alittle bit of an exaggeration, but not much of one for your typical Japanese salaryman. Sometimes they get Sunday off, but if they get it "off" they usually have other obligations on that day. (source)

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
    4. Re:A Failed System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I met the right people by being smart and creative and by never giving up even when all seemed hopeless. It took decades, but I made it.

    5. Re:A Failed System by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      Working 12 hours a day 7 days a week would actually be illegal in the EU.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:A Failed System by nnet · · Score: 1

      EU != Japan. How is that relevant?

    7. Re:A Failed System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I met the right people by doing jack shit.

      I would have done less if I'd "made" my birth lotto better.

      I bet you think you're wealthy. It's a reasonable thing to think when you're wealthier than your neighbors. Than everyone you know. It's quite understandable that you'll never realize how puny your decades will stack against rent-seeking I barely look at.

    8. Re:A Failed System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical Eurocentrism.

    9. Re:A Failed System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of very old and incorrect stereotyping in your comment, japan even has laws around working hours now to prevent long work days. Average working hours per year in Japan is actually comparable to most modern countries now and less than many.

    10. Re:A Failed System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that site is actually very out dated, all pre 2010 information. Japan has significantly reduced working hours since then and even has laws around number of overtime hours permitted per month.

    11. Re:A Failed System by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      amusing site, perhaps instead of facts and details it should be called HISTORICAL facts and details.

  37. Re:Occupied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Self-loathing fuck.

  38. 2x life extension? Unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Current life span is about 75. I don't see people living to 150. Hell I don't see people WANTING to live that long in old age misery.

    1. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Sweden and Japan it's probably closer to 80, and the life expectancy of those born today nearing 100. While it's unlikely that mankind will have a higher average age than something around 110 (since max statistical age is just shy of 120) until we start doing specific gene therapy to lengthen telomeres and actively repair damage to critical systems.

      The issue is that the capitalistic system is built on growth, this growth is a delicate balance that both depends on innovation (more "produce" from each manhour) as well as population growth.

      When population growth stops or even reverses one of the mechanisms for economic growth is stunted. Add to this the problem of keeping a larger and larger percentage of the population healthy and fed while no longer employed.

      A sound pension system would be earned and put aside during the working age of the population. But once again we are faced with a problem, today many countries uses the next generation to pay (at least partially) for current retirement plans. To change this the current generation needs to start making larger pension savings (this could be private or nationally organized) while at the same time covering the same economical commitments as previous generations, as well as the increased cost of more elderly right now.

    2. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by famebait · · Score: 2

      The actual goods and services consumed by pensioners will still be produced by the contemporary work force. The funding is just bookkeeping. If the number of consumers vs producers are too far off then at least one of the sides will suffer, no matter how you stack it.

      Unless productivity per man-hour suddenly shoots up. It just might, but that's a pretty scary bet.

      There is also a downside to a savings-heavy approach: a greater portion of the economy is owned and governed according to the interest of pensioners, at the expense of the rest of society. Might not always be what you want.

      But it's funny you mention Sweden - the Nordic countries are an interesting contrast to Japan: There it is common for women to have both children and a career, thanks to generous maternity and paternity leaves, and comprehensive subsidized daycare. The birth rate is still a bit shy of balanced, but they are nowhere near heading for the scale of problems that Japan or even Italy are facing. Does require quite a fair bit of taxing, though.

      --
      sudo ergo sum
    3. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is that the capitalistic system is built on growth, this growth is a delicate balance that both depends on innovation (more "produce" from each manhour) as well as population growth.

      That's quite a cute way to describe something that's basically a Ponzi scheme.

    4. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The actual goods and services consumed by pensioners will still be produced by the contemporary work force. The funding is just bookkeeping.

      Not completely. If a person was foolish enough to not plan for retirement, they might have to live on Social Security. But that is a pittance. Many of us invested and saved and took advantage of every opportunity to provide for retirement.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      They are a first world country, the level of consumption is already orders of magnitude more than most of the world. Having to dedicate more GDP to elderly care rather than consuming so much luxury is hardly a problem. It will not make them poor compared to most of the world, just less obscenely rich.

      Unlike say Europe they are also less in competition for their best and brightest with foreign countries.

    6. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      Having more paper doesn't create production out of thin air, the funding is still "just" book keeping.

    7. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Having more paper doesn't create production out of thin air, the funding is still "just" book keeping.

      Not certain I understand. I'm making my money the same way I made it through my adult life, except for the actual working. Not certain how my living off of my investments is costing anyone anything. Is there some sort of problem with that?

      The meme of the parasitic retired person is just that - a meme. That there are some folks for whom SS is their only money is true, but I'm not costing society anything.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    8. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other problem with the coming Japanese population distribution is elder care. The workforce will have to produce the needed goods plus care for all the elderly, for which will be an ever increasing demand. So yes, they will need massive productivity gains, or at least robots that can care for the elderly.

    9. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      produce > consume
      consume > produce

      Choose one, rent-seeker.

    10. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      When you say "cost" you are book keeping. You might see the rents on your financial capital and real estate as a moral absolute, but what paper gives, the state can take away with the stroke of a pen. Someone can always be found to declare that absolutely moral too.

      Unlike the amount of rent you are due untaxed in the future, the equation production = consumption(+storage+spoilage) is simply a fact.

    11. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      produce > consume consume > produce

      Choose one, rent-seeker.

      I produced a lot in my career. Now I'm consuming the profits of that production.

      Sad part is so few people understand.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    12. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      When you say "cost" you are book keeping.

      Oy - by that definition, there is no wealth anywhere, since humans decide on completely arbitrary things ot attach wealth to. That includes gold.

      Well okay, I have to go catch up on some of my imaginary money bookkeeping. Thanks for playing the Most pointless statements ever game - I think you won.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      There are good odds that government will make a huge shift to the left, Bernie got close to presidency and Zuckerberg is pushing universal income. If that ever came to pass your paper wealth would be reduced massively, yet the equation production = consumption(+storage+spoilage) remains a simple fact.

      There is a qualitative difference between bookkeeping and facts of economic reality.

    14. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by david_thornley · · Score: 1
      It's not money. It's goods and services. We can produce a certain amount of both, which is limited at any given time (and, one would hope, tending upwards over the years). Services are transient, and many goods are too, so we have to keep up production to maintain the same wealth. We have to keep producing enough food for everyone over and over, and most things wear out and have to be replaced.

      Money is a claim on the goods and services. Without the goods and services, it's useless. Confederate money is just pretty paper, because it isn't a valid claim.

      Unless we reach the Singularity, we're going to need working people to provide goods and services, and these people are going to have to make enough to give everyone enough stuff. Having a rapidly rising population means there's a lot of economically unproductive children, and having a rapidly aging population means there's a lot of economically unproductive or underproductive elderly, and that means that what working people produce has to be spread more thinly.

      To put it in terms of money, as the population ages a lot of us old farts are going to need more nursing care, while the supply of people in the right age group to be nurses stays steady or diminishes. That means that nurses will become more expensive. Presumably this will attract people into nursing, but that will take people from other productive areas, so the supply of other stuff will get strained and get more expensive.

      What we're going to see if we go along this path is inflation, since we'll have more demand for stuff and less supply. The money we've been putting away for retirement will be worth less and less.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    15. Re:2x life extension? Unlikely. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      People absolutely hate falling standards of living. We're seeing social unrest in the US because it's harder to earn a decent living than it used to be. The elderly are likely to accept some decline, but if it starts cutting into the working-age standard of living there's going to be problems.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  39. less people - less evil, less greed yah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good riddance, many people are just selfish, greedy and irresponsible jerks.

  40. de-evolution ? by swell · · Score: 1

    My neighbor, Robert Klark Graham, founder of the 'Nobel Sperm Bank' had a favorite slogan: "The smarter you are, the more children you should have." He would publish that as an advert in various Mensa publications. I attended some of his talks which were always uplifting and positive, but I never heard him mention the corollary to his slogan. (i.e. 'what about other people?')

    In any case, we seem to have got that obvious evolutionary lesson backward. Certain populations reproduce like bunnies while the smart people are frugal in that sense. Where will this trend take us?

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:de-evolution ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Certain populations reproduce like bunnies, but the link is usually to lack of educations, not low inteligence. Too generations of good diet in childhood and basic education and academic acheivement equalizes almost universally. A lower birthrate doesn't mean that ones children are less likely to be morons.

    2. Re:de-evolution ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was already thoroughly explored in the 2006 documentary Idiocracy.

    3. Re:de-evolution ? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Normally the stereotype smart guy not getting the girl. Is due to some other flaws not because they are smart.
      However family planning is a new concept where it makes more personal economic since to have less children then more, while good for the economy on a large scale. However right now we are faced with overpopulation as a stresser too. We cannot afford to use up the resources faster then they can be made and we need to preserve for the next generation.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:de-evolution ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [citation needed]

    5. Re:de-evolution ? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I don't claim to have the answer, other than just my own opinion. That said, I think it's somewhat of a positive thing that more intelligent populations are wise enough to have fewer children. It acts as a form of self-balancing in population control. A numerical "thermostat" if you will. Eventually, children of poorer populations will become educated enough to also have fewer children in the proceeding generations to come. My big gripe is that children of course suffer needlessly in the process. So while they, like any of us, didn't choose which skin to be born in, it's the duty of the parents to self-sacrifice for the betterment of their upbringing and future success.

      For example, I'm pushing about 12 working hours a dat while the wife stays home taking care of our son. Her job is 24/7 365 days a year without a paycheck. Mine is complete burnout to oblivion burning both end of the candle. In either case, NOBODY is going to give two-fucks about the wellbeing of our child. I just accept that as a fact of life. So be it. And so the cycle of life continues. It's how I rationalize it. It's how I accept it for what it is.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    6. Re:de-evolution ? by careysub · · Score: 1

      This was already thoroughly explored in the 2006 documentary Idiocracy.

      And before that The Marching Morons by Cyril M. Kornbluth.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    7. Re:de-evolution ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When he says "should," is he invoking some sort of moral obligation, or is he trying to reason that smart people will naturally have more money and be more desirable, so statistically it is probable that they will have more children?

      I guess it doesn't matter, he would be wrong on both counts. Smart people have a harder time finding compatible mates...most people are stupider than they are and hence can't relate to them. Of the few smart people that do exist....it is even harder to find a good match because smart people are intrinsically more complex, and hence have more points of compatibility that must be met. Lastly, smart people are smart enough to foresee the tremendous costs and risks associated with breeding, and often wisely opt-out.

      On the moral side...being born does not obligate one to give birth. That's patently absurd. Nobody asked to be born. Nobody had the chance to negotiate, protest, or accept the arrangement. So there is no obligation at all.

      Being superior does not obligate one to be more of a servant. The inferior ones love to try and spin that theme...."you are the only one who can, so you must!" Or "this would make everything better for everybody, so you must!" Nonsense. Morality only obligates me to abstain from harming you and to give you whatever I have freely agreed to give. It stops there.

    8. Re:de-evolution ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Certain populations reproduce like bunnies while the smart people are frugal in that sense. Where will this trend take us?

      Watch the documentary "Idiocracy" for the answer.

  41. I too have that dream... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...of being the town despot,, like Boss Hogg or that character Leonardo DiCaprio plays in Django Unchained.

  42. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More room for activities!

  43. Re: Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by Gay+Boner+Sex · · Score: 1

    Seven and three quarters inches here and that is without Cialis.

    Article is a FUD piece. Americans are the best hung in the world. Germans are the least. Ask me how I know.

  44. Good for them by rrohbeck · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They seem to be the only country that's adapting to mineral and energy depletion. Other countries will have a rude awakening in a couple of years.

  45. Re:It should go OK as long as they don't by rrohbeck · · Score: 0

    > It should go OK as long as they don't let Christians in. They want people who want to support and be part of the society. Cristians are mandated by their belief to undermine non-Christian societies and when they have sufficient numbers take over.

  46. Let's open the borders! That'll fix it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Because all people are exactly the same, and Somalia is exactly the same as Japan.

  47. What is the problem?? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 0

    Majority of you are liberal environmentalists. There is nothing worse you can do for the environment than popping out another baby.

    You can drive a gigantic diesel SUV and use plastic bags for everything and eat beef every day cooked over a coal fire, and as long as you didn't breed you'll be WAY greener than a Prius-driving tofu-eating vegan who bred.

    You all should be admiring Japan's new achievement rather than fretting about how to help them grow their population.

    1. Re:What is the problem?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There is nothing worse you can do for the environment than popping out another baby.

      Bingo....it's not the evil fossil fuels, but the hoards of humanity that demand energy, food and water that is the challenge we face. Declining population is what we need, not more folk wanting more iPhones.

      Japan seems to be pulling their weight in this regard....hopefully we'll all follow suit sooner or later.

  48. I volunteer to help boost the population!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please supply a steady stream of over 18 years old women (maids please :) ).

    Willing to work overtime on weekends as well. LOL :)

  49. not equivalent by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    > It should go OK as long as they don't let Christians in. They want people who want to support and be part of the society. Cristians are mandated by their belief to undermine non-Christian societies and when they have sufficient numbers take over.

    While to certain extent this is true there is a big difference between what all but a tiny minority of Christians would want. Firstly very few of them oppose secular democratic governments. They would be happy to convert all the non-Christians that they can, but still have a secular government employing people of all faiths and representing everyone. Secondly all but a few support equal rights for all, whatever religion. They would not want non-Christians to be unable to testify in court against Christans, nor would they want to prevent non-Christians from building or maintaining places of worship, or worshiping in public. They would not see expression of another faith as blasphemy, punishable by state law.

    Also they would not want non-Christians to be subject to a punitive tax to make them feel subdued, nor believe that they should be killed if they did not accept the inferior treatment. On a personal level, very few would condemn Christians for having non-Christian friends apart from befriending them in order to convert them (though I have met a number of Christians who only seem to befriend non-Christians for this purpose themselves)

    1. Re:not equivalent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Tiny minority"? Shit, son, you ever been to America? Christians are, if anything, worse, if only because they don't think that they're doing it at all.

      When Christians in the USA have a secular government they still have laws on the books banning pepole who don't sign up for god getting power. They add laws making their religion a required "controversy to teach" in science class. And if their laws are used by Muslims to push Islam, they suddenly go to repealing that law.

    2. Re:not equivalent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      > It should go OK as long as they don't let Christians in. They want people who want to support and be part of the society. Cristians are mandated by their belief to undermine non-Christian societies and when they have sufficient numbers take over.

      While to certain extent this is true there is a big difference between what all but a tiny minority of Christians would want. Firstly very few of them oppose secular democratic governments. They would be happy to convert all the non-Christians that they can, but still have a secular government employing people of all faiths and representing everyone. Secondly all but a few support equal rights for all, whatever religion. They would not want non-Christians to be unable to testify in court against Christans, nor would they want to prevent non-Christians from building or maintaining places of worship, or worshiping in public. They would not see expression of another faith as blasphemy, punishable by state law.

      Also they would not want non-Christians to be subject to a punitive tax to make them feel subdued, nor believe that they should be killed if they did not accept the inferior treatment. On a personal level, very few would condemn Christians for having non-Christian friends apart from befriending them in order to convert them (though I have met a number of Christians who only seem to befriend non-Christians for this purpose themselves)

      Very well said. Christianity is explicitly clear about not undermining the societies they live in. Jesus himself commanded that we be obedient to the Government "render unto Cesare's the things that are Cesare's and to God the things that are God's". Sadly it appears that many people's perception of Christianity is based off of a limited experience or sample size. As an example, the MAJORITY of so called "Christians" that appear on "Christian Television" thumping their Bibles and selling their Holy Water so people can receive "God's Blessing" are nothing more than Charlatans. Yet sadly, this is what a lot of non-Christians see and they understandably draw conclusions that Christians are nut jobs because of the limited sample size. Unfortunately for Christians, Christianity (along with other religions of the world) has often been subverted by people seeking power or fortune and used it to further their goals. The result has been a negative backlash against religion in general and Christianity in particular (in the Western world) that makes it difficult to have an honest discussion about one's faith with non-believers.

      If one is able to cut through the negative perceptions people have of Christianity they might realize that many of the core beliefs are just good principles of a modern society. The ten commandments for example (with the exception of the first) lay the foundation for modern secular society:

      1. Being aware that God exists
      2. Not to have other gods or idols (don't let possessions or things control your life)
      3. Not to use God's name falsely or uselessly (don't swear in public out of common decency)
      4. To keep the Sabbath (don't work yourself to death...)
      5. Honor your parents
      6. Do not murder
      7. Do not commit adultery
      8. Do not steal
      9. Do not lie
      10. Do not covet

      Keep in mind that when these commandments (and the rest of the "law") was given to Moses, the civilizations of the day were absolutely brutal and barbaric. An oft repeated mission given to Israel was to destroy those other civilizations that worshiped idols and we think "how terrible"! The rest of the story (and just one example) is that one of the "idols" some of these civilizations worshiped was Moloch and the custom of the day was to heat the idol as hot as possible and throw humans (including their children) into it to be burned. There are many parts of the Bible that are brutal and difficult to understand in the context of our modern world but as a whole, I'd much rather live in a predominantly

    3. Re:not equivalent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of Christianity's problems and pathologies arose from Protestantism. Real Christians are legit.

  50. We should learn from their example by Subm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The rest of the world could learn from their example and allow the earth's population to drop naturally.

    Instead everyone falls back on knee-jerk beliefs that

    - We need exponentially growing economies, which require exponentially growing populations, which are impossible to sustain on a finite planet

    - Going to Mars will somehow alleviate overpopulation on Earth

    - Populations are leveling off, which isn't related to the problem that we are over the planet's carrying capacity, drawing down and depleting resources

    - Too few young people won't be able to support older ones, despite increases in productivity that allow 2% of the population to do what used to take 25%, to use the example of farming

    - Lowering the population means eugenics or racism

    - Human nature [insert opinion about human nature]

    - Fusion or some other technology will save us (without population control it extends the overshoot leading to collapse)

    - etc

    All of the above beliefs are demonstrably wrong. There's no reason we can't allow the population to decrease without hurting anyone or any economy by simply having fewer children. Everyone would live in a world of more abundance per person. There would be as much culture as before and the species' chances of survival would increase.

    The challenge is doing it. Step one is disabusing ourselves of the above beliefs.

    1. Re:We should learn from their example by iampiti · · Score: 1

      Learn from them? I virtually all western countries birth rates have declined so much that population would be reducing were not for inmigration. Nonetheless, there's lots of poor people in the world that want to go to those countries.
      It's widely known birth rate reduces with the increase of the standards of living. Right now population growth is mainly driven by India and Africa. India looks like it will stabilize in the medium term, Africa doesn't look good in the near future.
      To sum up, many countries have "learnt" from Japan, it's just that other countries are moving their people to the first ones

    2. Re:We should learn from their example by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The rest of the world could learn from their example and allow the earth's population to drop naturally.

      Except that's not what Japan is doing. They're trying various things to try to get their population to stop falling. Of course, they're trying everything but admitting that their make-work culture is bullshit...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:We should learn from their example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >There's no reason we can't allow the population to decrease without hurting anyone or any economy by simply having fewer children.

      You are right, a responsible civilization can, should, will, and does populate themselves within their means, (give or take a few outlying families).
      The henomenon of population lowering in one culture is offset by great birthrates in others. And to responsible cultures that is a problem. Because they're witnessing the irresponsible, less educated, social program dependent, and less skilled cultures having lots of babies.

      This is not new actually, where poverty is rife and education minimal, one of the favoured ways to 'pass the time' is (cough) cuddle-time. And such cultures put a lot of value in large families because it's one of the things they've 'got'.

      Ever seen the film Mediocracy?

    4. Re:We should learn from their example by starless · · Score: 1

      It's widely known birth rate reduces with the increase of the standards of living.

      Not fundamentally standard of living, but rather female education.
      Although those two tend to be correlated as well.
      e.g.
      http://www.economist.com/node/...

    5. Re:We should learn from their example by Drethon · · Score: 1

      - Going to Mars will somehow alleviate overpopulation on Earth

      Going to Mars is meant to prevent rapid underpopulation of Earth the next time a major disaster occurs, it wont do anything for overpopulation.

    6. Re:We should learn from their example by Drethon · · Score: 1

      Should have said rapid underpopulation of the human race, wont help Earth much...

    7. Re:We should learn from their example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "- Too few young people won't be able to support older ones, despite increases in productivity that allow 2% of the population to do what used to take 25%, to use the example of farming"

      I disagree here, there would be enough to support everyone if so much value wasn't extracted out of the system by the 1%ers. Most of the gains in productivity end up in their bank accounts.

    8. Re:We should learn from their example by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      That's a VERY long-range goal. How many people do you need for a modern technological economy in isolation? A hundred thousand? Ten million?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  51. Wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Communes have government that does not do that.

    And it;s a feature of capitalism that any government will do it. Why the hell do you think that government is the reason why it's prevalent? What part of the role or definition of government has that as its inevitable conclusion? Nothing. It's CAPITALISM that has this feeding off the work of others. By fucking definition. Those who own the means of production do not have the actual physical power to make that production happen, so they get others to do it and live off their effort.

    The rich man will do anything for the poor man except get off his back.

    1. Re:Wrong. by gtall · · Score: 0

      Okay, from now on we all gonna live in small communes...and trade goods, not money...and...and...die early deaths because there was no government that could put money into research, or watch over the environment to tell everyone to stop certain harmful behaviors. And roads, no need for stinking interstates, we'll just build small roads between the communes. And standards, who needs a government to decide what units of measurement mean, communes can do it for themselves, let there be lots of standards. Every commune can have their own damn universities, no need for common standards in science, each commune can decide for itself.

      Wow!! What a utopia, where do I sign up?

    2. Re:Wrong. by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      I think you have a mistaken view of where capitalism really differs from previous systems. In a capitalist system, money is used to induce changes instead of other tools. Feudal societies had systems of obligations where the poor gave to the rich. Communist societies had their own systems of obligations and control. In a capitalist society, at least you get paid and you get a choice of where to spend the money you are paid. Is it always amazing? No. It's just much better than what preceded it, and it is looking like enough people feel the way you do that it is probably better than what will follow as well. Also, I think most of the problems that people have with capitalism has to do with "mega corporations" doing nasty things. I think you might find that these mega corporations are often enabled by governments to do the nasty things they do, whether that is building backdoors in their tools or getting corporate welfare. Big business and big gov are hand in hand, and that's not a problem specific to capitalism.

  52. Re:Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    That's what happens when you don't adopt the metric system.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  53. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If we had never found the means to use fossil fuels but still gotten to 7 billion people, how much CO2 would we add to the atmosphere each year?

    If the resources used by each USian like you were dropped to that of the average African, that would drop resource use by a factor of six. Not one person would need to be removed.

    Greedy assholes are the problem, and to have one greedy asshole you need to have one greedy asshole born into the world. That doesn't make birth the reason for the shit the greedy asshole did.

  54. Re:Occupied by Desler · · Score: 1

    So don't act like Japan did during the early 1900s?

  55. What about 1945? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet it fell even faster that year.

  56. Re:Occupied by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Maybe if we started respecting and encouraging other people's culture rather than always invading and destroying they would flourish. Our arrogance is totally destructive.

    It was truly terrible how America, with no provocation at all suddenly decided, "HEY!, let's go and destroy teh culture of Japan. They haven't done a damn thing to us, but that's pretty suspicious, and no doubt.

    The historical record is clear. America, for no reason whatsoever, decided to attack the most pacifistic country in the world, that being Japan. A massacre indeed, as Japan had no navy or army, and was completely defenseless.

    Seriously, at some level, self loathing and self hatred becomes indistinguishable from insanity.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  57. Fastest rate of decline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the fastest rate of decline was over a few milliseconds in 1945.

    1. Re:Fastest rate of decline by careysub · · Score: 1

      You are correct about this - it is the largest number of people killed in such a short span of time since the beginning of history. But the time frame was more like 10 seconds, the time it took the blast wave to reach the periphery of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For the most people killed in a 24 hour period though it was the Great Tokyo Fire Raid that did that.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  58. Re: Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    Your doing it wrong.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  59. Social Safety nets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are having fewer children because we're so productive and good at keeping them alive, there isn't as much incentive to spawn half a dozen or more for extra farm labor.

    And we have social safety nets - like Social Security - so folks don't have secure their retirement by having a lot of kids to support them when they are old.

  60. Not in misery by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Hell I don't see people WANTING to live that long in old age misery.

    The point you are missing is that there will be no "old age misery" until close to 150.

    If you could feel like you were 40-50 until you reached about 130-140... why would you NOT want to do that?

    It upends a lot of systems though, and drastically changes calculations around retirement.

    Best prepare for it now though.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  61. They are friendly because you will leave eventuall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're a tourist spending money. They like that. Try moving there. Now you are the foreigner they despise.

  62. I don't see it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If we can't even make 80 the new 50 right now, I don't see 130 being the new 40.

  63. It's all the tentacle sex... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course there is a "low birth rate" in Japan. Look at their Hentai. Human/Octopus/Alien hybrids probably don't show up on the census questionnaire.

  64. Obvious solution by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    Work less and fuck more.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  65. Re:They are friendly because you will leave eventu by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Japan is one of the only countries that still has a racial criterion for citizenship, but I was in no way "despised." I was just considered "different." They were shocked that I could learn kanji, a system which actually has a lot more internal logic, which assists learnability, than outsiders give it credit for.

  66. Universe 25: Parallels to Calhoun mice experiments by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    http://io9.gizmodo.com/how-rat...

    How Mice Turned Their Private Paradise Into A Terrifying Dystopia

    Universe 25 was a giant box designed to be a rodent utopia. The trouble was, this utopia did not have a benevolent creator. John B. Calhoun had designed quite a few mouse environments before he got to the 25th one, and didn't expect to be watching a happy story. Divided into "main squares" and then subdivided into levels, with ramps going up to "apartments," the place looked great, and was always kept stocked with food, but its inhabitants were doomed from the get-go.

    Universe 25 started out with eight mice, four males and four females. By day 560, the mouse population reached 2,200, and then steadily declined back down to unrecoverable extinction. At the peak population, most mice spent every living second in the company of hundreds of other mice. They gathered in the main squares, waiting to be fed and occasionally attacking each other. Few females carried pregnancies to term, and the ones that did seemed to simply forget about their babies. They'd move half their litter away from danger and forget the rest. Sometimes they'd drop and abandon a baby while they were carrying it. ...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  67. Re:They are friendly because you will leave eventu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Despise" is far too much. They'll never be rude to your face. And that isn't superficial, they genuinely mean no ill will, they really are civil.

    But. Outsiders are outsiders. They embrace at arm's length (actually touching isn't very big) and that might surface in thoughts of who they consider for stuff, who they invite to stuff, who they're willing or begrudging to bless with their son/daughter.

    I'm thinking it's only when It's Personal. They'll probably stay objective when, say, a company is picking a contract or vendor. Though, micro it down to "picking a resume" and the xeno effect might be a factor.

    PS kanji is a clusterfuck and everyone knows it

  68. How can over-population problem ever be fixed? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Everybody knows that the massive increase in population, in the last century, is causing serious environmental issues.

    But whenever a population is not growing as fast as it once was, it is considered a crises.

    1. Re:How can over-population problem ever be fixed? by gravewax · · Score: 1

      financially speaking it is a crisis, most modern economies are not geared to cope well with the large population that moves into old age without an underlying younger population to support it.

  69. Re:Universe 25: Parallels to Calhoun mice experime by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    If only the mice had Netflix or some other form of virtual escape from their reality.

    I suspect that humans are probably able to adapt to population densities far exceeding what mice can tolerate. Of course if we try that experiment we'll all go to prison for human atrocities.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  70. Re:Tiny penis + NEET = doomed population by prefec2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    But they have the biggest dick as president. That must count for something.

  71. oh dear! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow, if the gravity constant has changed drastically in japan the olympic participants will have a hard setting any new records going any faster.

  72. Re:Universe 25: Parallels to Calhoun mice experime by Whorhay · · Score: 1

    I kind of doubt that, or at least I'd be pretty damned surprised. If we look at the experiment we can do some math to see what kind of population density we're talking about.

    Cage dimensions:
    108 x 108 x 54 inches
    629,856 cubic inches in volume

    If we make a silly and low ball guess that his mice were 2 cubic inches in volume, that gives each mouse an environment which is 143.15 times it's own volume.

    If the average human is 0.0711 cubic meters in volume then you end up with 10.178 cubic meters of habitat. If you go with very low ceilings then you're looking at 5 square meters per person. And keep in mind that's not just the place where you crash for the night, that represents the entire space that you spend your whole life in. On top of that the experiment didn't actually give the mice the run of that entire space, they were limited to the sides and bottom of the box.

  73. Re: Occupied by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Unit 731 was the epitome of high culture. Ancestral worship of war-criminals just needs to be accepted and appreciated for what it is! By the way, it wasn't a 'death march' so much as it was a spirited hike in the mountains.

    Why yes, yes I am being a bit facetious. ;-)

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  74. Re:Universe 25: Parallels to Calhoun mice experime by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    On the other hand- despite food being available they stopped breeding.

    And once enough mice died off, they didn't start breeding again.

    That's damn strange.

    It started with 4 mice. They started acting odd and killing each other long before reaching the space available. And their population peaked long before they reached the limit of available breeding spots (private housing so to speak).

    Same thing happened with rats.

    And we are mammals too.

    I'm just raising the point that the japanese could have slid into a similar tho not identical behavioral sink. Their young men show the "beautiful ones" behavior.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.