Living in japan, this is not surprising. To make a long story short... all current government policies are made to help and benefit the elderly. After all, remember that Japan IS a VERY...
Exemplary
Living in japan, this is not surprising. To make a long story short... all current government policies are made to help and benefit the elderly. After all, remember that Japan IS a VERY conservative nation... and that means the political party currently in charge does its damnedest to make sure they STAY in power. In fact, the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party... very much a misnomer) has been in power for almost 50 years, I believe... there was a very short stint with another party, but it soon switched back. Anyways, the elderly vote in the LDP, and so their policies are meant to cater to the elderly. Anything about youth or "having more children" "getting more child-producing marriages"... you quickly find out that it's a case of "We acknowledge this is a problem, but any action regarding it is going to be made by the people in charge... who are also probably the WORST people possible to make these decisions". I.e., the old men (and women!) who know very little about anything outside their generation, and just want to make sure they keep collecting that sweet, sweet pension money.
Let's put it at this: for anyone who follows US politics and thinks that voter apathy can be high in the US... it ain't got anything on the level in Japan. The youth are at most getting lip service from the government, so they go "Why even bother?" Add that in to literally being outnumbered (the reverse of the US situation)... well, there's a lot of cultural change that would need to happen, and the only to do THAT would be to have an outside act.
So long as the birth rate stays below replacement, the elderly will always be the largest cohort as every successive generation will be smaller than the preceding one. Sure, the values will shift...
So long as the birth rate stays below replacement, the elderly will always be the largest cohort as every successive generation will be smaller than the preceding one. Sure, the values will shift with every generation, but it will always be the values of the elderly generation and the priorities of the old.
The other comment for this put it quite nicely, but there's one more factor: Japan very much has an "I suffered, so others must suffer too/ it's THEIR turn to suffer what I went through" issue. Or...
The other comment for this put it quite nicely, but there's one more factor:
Japan very much has an "I suffered, so others must suffer too/ it's THEIR turn to suffer what I went through" issue.
Or to put it another way: in junior high school, all kids generally have to join a club. The older members of the club tend to do things to the younger members that are... less than pleasant (not hazing, but more like extra tasks). The younger members swear that when they're finally the senior members, they're going to change things... except that when they DO become the seniors, they actually end up carrying on the same traditions that they originally disliked, because now they don't have to do them. And thus the cycle continues.
Now take this idea, but apply it at a national level where the seniors... don't even get replaced. Thus, no one is breaking the cycle.
This isn't "news" as in "sudden and unexpected development", but it is It is news as in "a very serious event that shows no signs of being under control which is indicative of a wider global...
This isn't "news" as in "sudden and unexpected development", but it is
It is news as in "a very serious event that shows no signs of being under control which is indicative of a wider global crisis." Less like coverages of a new fire; more like coverages of yet another town being engulfed by a continuing fire.
For more insight on why Japanese young people aren't having kids, watch Shogo's video. They're a Japanese YouTuber couple who loves Japanese traditional culture, who have three kids and have decided they need to leave Japan for their kids to have a future. Video (16:15) sections :
Japan has too many natural disasters - 18.3% of the worldwide cost of disaster DMG is spent in JP despite occupying only 0.28% of the global land mass.
Elders always have priority - seniority beats logic or facts; for a rational and efficient person, this kind of culture is painful to live in. What does it mean for a young person to grow up in a culture like this? He goes into more details most relevant for this topic, such as how Japan ranks dead last among OECD countries for spending on education. Begins at 5:00
National power is determined to weaken: lower population = less robust economy = smaller tax base = even less government resources for kids. More details beginning at 9:08
my own less insightful comment about AI
They've been pitting their hopes on robots for so long they're calling it AI now. Same thing: tech was supposed to replace the productivity of youthful humans, increase efficiency of services of health/elder care humans, and provide both continuity of historic cultural Arts as well as emotional companionship to elder generations. I'm not making fun of Japan for not getting it wrong, I'm holding them up as prophecy for our own western nations. We're relying on tech which won't be enough, and immigration which wont allow enough.
Hopefully this doesn’t derail too much and my perspective as an American likely skews things, but I’m not sure there’s anywhere that’s particularly conducive to raising children right now. I’d...
Hopefully this doesn’t derail too much and my perspective as an American likely skews things, but I’m not sure there’s anywhere that’s particularly conducive to raising children right now.
I’d like to settle down and start a family at some point, but I don’t like the idea of doing that here in the US due to things like lack of affordable housing in places that have plentiful work and people want to live in, no bikeable/walkable mixed zone neighborhoods, and the fact that school shootings happen at all. College years and adulthood are something else but I’d personally much rather raise a family somewhere like Japan for the first 18 years.
The grass is always greener on the other side. That being said, if the plan involves working for a Japanese company, or if you’re ethnically obviously not Japanese (in other words, not Asian), I’d...
The grass is always greener on the other side.
That being said, if the plan involves working for a Japanese company, or if you’re ethnically obviously not Japanese (in other words, not Asian), I’d double check whether or not you’d really want to pursue this plan, if nothing else for the sake of your children, who will not have a great time in school or in society. It won’t be fun regularly being mistaken for a tourist in the country you were born in.
Having lived there in the past, I think it'd probably be alright overall as long as one sticks to local offices of foreign companies or overseas remote work for employment and lives in one of the...
Having lived there in the past, I think it'd probably be alright overall as long as one sticks to local offices of foreign companies or overseas remote work for employment and lives in one of the bigger metros. Nobody really blinks an eye at foreigners in Tokyo any more for example, and during my past few visits I even had multiple people I interacted with assume I spoke Japanese on first interaction even though I'm very obviously a foreigner.
Not that everything would be rosy, of course. It won't be anywhere, it's all about which tradeoffs one is willing to make.
Nobody blinks an eye in Tokyo, but they will absolutely think you're 1) a tourist or 2) someone who moved as an adult. It says something that the mark of mastery of Japanese is when someone in...
Nobody blinks an eye in Tokyo, but they will absolutely think you're 1) a tourist or 2) someone who moved as an adult. It says something that the mark of mastery of Japanese is when someone in Japan asks how long you've lived in Japan - which, if you were born there, is still insulting.
That people speak Japanese to you is more a sign of the general (in) ability and willingness to speak English in Japan.
Maybe, but in my experience it's something that changed over time. When I was first there about 15 years ago, the rate at which people would attempt to engage with English was higher and getting...
That people speak Japanese to you is more a sign of the general (in) ability and willingness to speak English in Japan.
Maybe, but in my experience it's something that changed over time. When I was first there about 15 years ago, the rate at which people would attempt to engage with English was higher and getting acknowledgement that you could understand and speak Japanese was more difficult. I think it might be better if "foreigner == English" isn't a prevailing assumption.
As an English speaking expat who has family overseas, a source of income which doesn't rely on your absolute conformity to society, the ability to befriend like minded young families locally, and...
As an English speaking expat who has family overseas, a source of income which doesn't rely on your absolute conformity to society, the ability to befriend like minded young families locally, and someone who has a place to flee to in case of natural disaster, absolutely Japan sounds like a dream to raise a kid in. Basically combine the best of both worlds: benefit from the clean environment, the politeness of the Japanese people, the wonderful culture and rich history, with the freedoms we're used to from an individualistic society.
For those who don't have the privilege though, I can see why more people in JP than America have voted with their singleness/child free decisions or up and left.
Edit: and yes I would also sooner have kids in Japan, or indeed most OECD countries instead of America, for the reasons you outlined and for having the privileges I listed.
I imagine that for kids, having experience living both in Japan and somewhere else might be pretty valuable, so moving seems understandable. I’m curious about what the schools in Japan are like; I...
I imagine that for kids, having experience living both in Japan and somewhere else might be pretty valuable, so moving seems understandable. I’m curious about what the schools in Japan are like; I don’t think national average spending on education says very much about what it’s like for the kids.
It's a very strict, drill-style education system. There's an enormous amount of pressure on kids to work hard and get good grades, to the point that whole extra cram schools are open on weekday...
It's a very strict, drill-style education system. There's an enormous amount of pressure on kids to work hard and get good grades, to the point that whole extra cram schools are open on weekday evenings which the vast majority have to go to in order to keep up with the expectations of perfect performance. Many students don't get enough sleep. After school clubs are numerous, but highly regimented (as has been mentioned elsewhere), and can be as stressful as school given how seriously members are expected to take participation.
And that's before we get into the aspects of not looking Japanese. Japan is not outwardly racist, but it's very suspicious of foreigners. I (an unassuming 20 year old at the time) would routinely sit down on the train or bus, and have people next to me stand up and find a seat further away. Children would stare. When I took my visiting parents to the zoo a Japanese child their parent asked "what are they?" referring to the white family having lunch. Friends who weren't living in cities for their years abroad found that they were ogled and followed around constantly by groups of curious girls and boys. I had to threaten a man to stop taking a video recording of my (ginger) sister who was just minding her own business in a market.
Japan is a wonderful country, with fascinating history, culture, food, and oftentimes genuinely wonderful and welcoming people. But it is not a comfortable place to be Different. School is already a difficult time for a lot of kids, and I sure as hell wouldn't want to put my daughter through the discomfort of going to school in Japan, and I say that as someone who absolutely loved my time there, and think that living and studying abroad is one of the best things a young person can do with their impressionable brain.
There are bits of schooling there that I think US schools should pick up, though, like students being required to help keep classrooms clean. That helps keep them from getting as messy in the...
There are bits of schooling there that I think US schools should pick up, though, like students being required to help keep classrooms clean. That helps keep them from getting as messy in the first place and instills some level of appreciation for janitorial staff, which is a stark contrast to US schools where the classrooms regularly look like hurricane aftermath because the mess isn’t the kids’ or teachers’ problem. My dad spent many years working as a school janitor, so this one is close to me.
On the train, I feel that some degree of peoples’ willingness to sit next to a foreigner depends on how the foreigner carries themselves. I’m pretty visibly foreign and it’s rare that someone isn’t sitting next to me. I’m naturally a bit more quiet and reserved though, and I think that comes through in things like body language too.
I'm skeptical of a lot of the speculation about Japan's fertility rate...because much of the developed world isn't that far off, and China and South Korea are even lower....
I'm skeptical of a lot of the speculation about Japan's fertility rate...because much of the developed world isn't that far off, and China and South Korea are even lower.
The replacement rate has to be over 2 for a population to not contract, and there aren't really any developed nations that are close, the US included.
Time at work could be the case, since the US probably has lower hours worked than Japan, which is lower than Korea, or it could be something completely different. Or, well, the state of cost of living around the world makes having a child a major financial handicap and eliminates time for leisure activities.
This is something of a tangent but in all the arguments about why birthrates are falling, a lot seem to boil down to "people want to have kids, but the circumstances make it difficult". What if a...
This is something of a tangent but in all the arguments about why birthrates are falling, a lot seem to boil down to "people want to have kids, but the circumstances make it difficult". What if a not insignificant number of people just don't want kids and have a much easier time now making that choice? Access to contraceptives, not living close to family (i.e. less nagging to make some grandkids), being able to retire without relying on your kids, access to a lot of other things you can be spending time doing that can feel just as fulfilling.
Don't get me wrong, I have kids, they're my favourite people in the world. Would kill or die for them. But raising children is one of the hardest jobs in the world. It is a HUGE life altering commitment, even with all the money and support in the world. I can see a lot of people just deciding it's not for them. I know it's not the only reason, but it's one I've rarely seen anyone talk about.
Tildes recently had a discussion around status being a cause of falling birthrates. I mentioned that Nordic countries provide unparalleled support to parents, but their fertility rates are still...
Tildes recently had a discussion around status being a cause of falling birthrates. I mentioned that Nordic countries provide unparalleled support to parents, but their fertility rates are still super low.
I want to have kids someday, but having them anytime soon would interfere with my ambitions. Furthermore, our cities aren't configured to make raising kids easy.
That's entirely a fair question to ask, and in fact is one that is asked. 2021 pew Research 56% of adults without kids said they just plain dont want any. But 43% cited other reasons: medical,...
That's entirely a fair question to ask, and in fact is one that is asked.
56% of adults without kids said they just plain dont want any. But 43% cited other reasons: medical, financial, no partner, age, state of the world, climate change, partner doesn't want kids.
people want to have kids, but the circumstances make it difficult. There's probably no point pushing the 56%, but much can be done to encourage/facilitate the ~43%. In addition to nudging those already have kids to have more.
According to a Japanese government survey, 60 percent of respondents feel it's difficult to be a parent in Japan. [...] "Both my husband and I really want to have kids right now. But I worry about our finances and how my husband and I will split the housework, so I wish I could make those concerns go away," she says.
Wow 56% is higher than I would have expected. I wonder if we'd gone back 50, 100 years how many of those 56% would have had children because they didn't maybe have a choice. And if those 43% were...
Wow 56% is higher than I would have expected. I wonder if we'd gone back 50, 100 years how many of those 56% would have had children because they didn't maybe have a choice. And if those 43% were somehow able to have children, would it be enough? Can they and others make up for those who don't want kids? Just hypothesising here, we'll probably never know. I can't help but think this pyramid scheme will fail one day and we should start designing a world which accommodate for that.
It's worth noting that's "A majority (56%) of non-parents younger than 50 who say it’s unlikely they will have children someday" (emphasis mine). If I'm reading the data correctly, that'd make the...
It's worth noting that's "A majority (56%) of non-parents younger than 50 who say it’s unlikely they will have children someday" (emphasis mine). If I'm reading the data correctly, that'd make the overall percentage of 18-49 year olds in the "just don't want kids" bucket about 12%.
Calculation
Percentage
Description
1617 / (1617 + 2249)
≈42%
Non-parents aged 18-49
824 / 1617
≈51%
Subset of previous row who say they're not likely to have kids (I'm probably misreading something because I can't seem to reconcile this with the 44% shown in the table, but accounting for rounding it's on the order of the error bars they quote at the top, so I'm not too worried in the scheme of things)
(824 - 353) / 824
≈57%
Subset of previous row who answered "just don't want" (again, 1% variation probably explained by rounding / didn't answer)
(824 - 353) / (1617 + 2249)
≈12%
Overall percentage of all adults aged 18-49 who don't want kids
Having actually worked in a "Multi-level marketing" company, that sounds harsh. And when fertility fails there's no re-designing the world, humanity will simply end within 80ish years. Anyway we...
Having actually worked in a pyramid scheme "Multi-level marketing" company, that sounds harsh. And when fertility fails there's no re-designing the world, humanity will simply end within 80ish years.
Anyway we only need slightly more than two kids per woman on average to replace and maintain our population. It can just be a rectangular prism if you like. With advances in reproductive medicine we actually only ever will need women to continue to species until we figure out wombs: gametogenesis for a woman to coax sperm cells from her cells. Average one per citizen would be enough.
Supporting some parents who do want kids so they can have more kids, to make up for all the others who don’t, seems like it might be pretty promising, in countries where immigration isn’t going to...
Supporting some parents who do want kids so they can have more kids, to make up for all the others who don’t, seems like it might be pretty promising, in countries where immigration isn’t going to do it.
A problem is that families in conservative communities are most likely to fit that description, which invites distrust.
It's totally possible you're right. There is an argument that children are an inferior good as having children is inversely correlated with higher income levels. The revealed preference for many...
It's totally possible you're right. There is an argument that children are an inferior good as having children is inversely correlated with higher income levels. The revealed preference for many people is, given the choice, they'd rather not have children instead of making any compromises in their living standards or ideal for raising kids.
That reminds me of this YouTube short also by Shogo. It's only a minute long, but for those who hate the Shorts format: it's predicted that the next likely major earthquake will be in the Nankai...
Japan has too many natural disasters - 18.3% of the worldwide cost of disaster DMG is spent in JP despite occupying only 0.28% of the global land mass.
That reminds me of this YouTube short also by Shogo. It's only a minute long, but for those who hate the Shorts format: it's predicted that the next likely major earthquake will be in the Nankai Trough, and will have MAJOR consequences. Worst case scenario would be 320,000 people dying, and 220 trillion yen in damages, which currently translates to qbout 1.5 trillion USD. For comparison, the 2011 earthquake had around 10,000 people killed, injured or left missing.
There's actually an entire Wikipedia page for "Nankai Megathrust Earthquakes" with a section on future earthquakes, and links to previous earthquakes. Something Shogo didn't mention is that they tend to happen in pairs, with a year or two between them. And the second earthquake is usually just as strong as the first (only two on that list registered below 8.0, and one of those two is 7.9), so they'd have that hanging over their heads during reconstruction... Assuming they can. 1.5 trillion in damages to a highly populated area will be pretty devastating.
Ever since I saw that short last year, I've felt like Japan's days are numbered.
Numbered in what way? It'll definitely be devastating, but I don't see any reason to see it as the end of the country. It's literally a regular event, that's why the prediction is made with so...
Numbered in what way? It'll definitely be devastating, but I don't see any reason to see it as the end of the country. It's literally a regular event, that's why the prediction is made with so much confidence. The last nankai earthquake happened DURING WW2. I'm sure they'll bounce back when not being reamed by the US navy as well.
The wiki also says they're taking steps to mitigate and have already dropped their projections for both death toll and damage pretty dramatically. Seems that they'll continue on this path and...
The wiki also says they're taking steps to mitigate and have already dropped their projections for both death toll and damage pretty dramatically. Seems that they'll continue on this path and hopefully further mitigate any potential damage and death.
It's the sheer economic damages that make me wary. Trillion is one of those numbers we can't visualize because it's too big, and the immediate damages alone could hit 200 trillion yen. For...
It's the sheer economic damages that make me wary. Trillion is one of those numbers we can't visualize because it's too big, and the immediate damages alone could hit 200 trillion yen. For comparison, this year's general budget is 112.57 trillion yen, which is the second-highest budget on record. If the worst case scenario DOES happen, it could become the most expensive natural disaster on record, which is currently held by the 2011 earthquake at 16.9 trillion yen/$360 billion.
I know Japan has suffered plenty of large earthquakes, but none that expensive, nor any with such a high potential death toll. 300,000 is no small number, especially given the 1944 and 1946 earthquakes didn't even total 3,000 casualties combined. Also remember that the landscape is very different from the 1940's, there's naturally been a lot more development since then which changes the scope of the damages.
Neither number are set in stone, especially with Japan taking preemptive action to mitigate damages. The potential is still pretty daunting to me, though. The most recent articles sourced on the Wikipedia page are from just last month, and seem to suggest that the current projected damages would be at least 200,000 deaths and 200 trillion yen if it were to happen right now. It may not destroy Japan, but I think at minimum, that would be devastating enough to trigger a large recession and economic crisis.
Japan has a looooooong history of being fucked by natural disasters then bouncing back. Humans are nothing if not resilient. We live in plenty of precarious places. The US has tornado alley, the...
Japan has a looooooong history of being fucked by natural disasters then bouncing back. Humans are nothing if not resilient. We live in plenty of precarious places. The US has tornado alley, the Phillipines have typhoons, India has heatwaves. Japan isn't even in the top 20 for natural disaster risk (they're #28).
Living in japan, this is not surprising. To make a long story short... all current government policies are made to help and benefit the elderly. After all, remember that Japan IS a VERY conservative nation... and that means the political party currently in charge does its damnedest to make sure they STAY in power. In fact, the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party... very much a misnomer) has been in power for almost 50 years, I believe... there was a very short stint with another party, but it soon switched back. Anyways, the elderly vote in the LDP, and so their policies are meant to cater to the elderly. Anything about youth or "having more children" "getting more child-producing marriages"... you quickly find out that it's a case of "We acknowledge this is a problem, but any action regarding it is going to be made by the people in charge... who are also probably the WORST people possible to make these decisions". I.e., the old men (and women!) who know very little about anything outside their generation, and just want to make sure they keep collecting that sweet, sweet pension money.
Let's put it at this: for anyone who follows US politics and thinks that voter apathy can be high in the US... it ain't got anything on the level in Japan. The youth are at most getting lip service from the government, so they go "Why even bother?" Add that in to literally being outnumbered (the reverse of the US situation)... well, there's a lot of cultural change that would need to happen, and the only to do THAT would be to have an outside act.
Seems like it's bound to change as the elderly die off?
So long as the birth rate stays below replacement, the elderly will always be the largest cohort as every successive generation will be smaller than the preceding one. Sure, the values will shift with every generation, but it will always be the values of the elderly generation and the priorities of the old.
The other comment for this put it quite nicely, but there's one more factor:
Japan very much has an "I suffered, so others must suffer too/ it's THEIR turn to suffer what I went through" issue.
Or to put it another way: in junior high school, all kids generally have to join a club. The older members of the club tend to do things to the younger members that are... less than pleasant (not hazing, but more like extra tasks). The younger members swear that when they're finally the senior members, they're going to change things... except that when they DO become the seniors, they actually end up carrying on the same traditions that they originally disliked, because now they don't have to do them. And thus the cycle continues.
Now take this idea, but apply it at a national level where the seniors... don't even get replaced. Thus, no one is breaking the cycle.
That seems so utterly bizarre to me, but I suppose it's something to do with being a Conservative culture, which generally reveres tradition over all?
This isn't "news" as in "sudden and unexpected development", but it is
It is news as in "a very serious event that shows no signs of being under control which is indicative of a wider global crisis." Less like coverages of a new fire; more like coverages of yet another town being engulfed by a continuing fire.
For more insight on why Japanese young people aren't having kids, watch Shogo's video. They're a Japanese YouTuber couple who loves Japanese traditional culture, who have three kids and have decided they need to leave Japan for their kids to have a future. Video (16:15) sections :
Japan has too many natural disasters - 18.3% of the worldwide cost of disaster DMG is spent in JP despite occupying only 0.28% of the global land mass.
Elders always have priority - seniority beats logic or facts; for a rational and efficient person, this kind of culture is painful to live in. What does it mean for a young person to grow up in a culture like this? He goes into more details most relevant for this topic, such as how Japan ranks dead last among OECD countries for spending on education. Begins at 5:00
National power is determined to weaken: lower population = less robust economy = smaller tax base = even less government resources for kids. More details beginning at 9:08
my own less insightful comment about AI
They've been pitting their hopes on robots for so long they're calling it AI now. Same thing: tech was supposed to replace the productivity of youthful humans, increase efficiency of services of health/elder care humans, and provide both continuity of historic cultural Arts as well as emotional companionship to elder generations. I'm not making fun of Japan for not getting it wrong, I'm holding them up as prophecy for our own western nations. We're relying on tech which won't be enough, and immigration which wont allow enough.
Hopefully this doesn’t derail too much and my perspective as an American likely skews things, but I’m not sure there’s anywhere that’s particularly conducive to raising children right now.
I’d like to settle down and start a family at some point, but I don’t like the idea of doing that here in the US due to things like lack of affordable housing in places that have plentiful work and people want to live in, no bikeable/walkable mixed zone neighborhoods, and the fact that school shootings happen at all. College years and adulthood are something else but I’d personally much rather raise a family somewhere like Japan for the first 18 years.
The grass is always greener on the other side.
That being said, if the plan involves working for a Japanese company, or if you’re ethnically obviously not Japanese (in other words, not Asian), I’d double check whether or not you’d really want to pursue this plan, if nothing else for the sake of your children, who will not have a great time in school or in society. It won’t be fun regularly being mistaken for a tourist in the country you were born in.
Having lived there in the past, I think it'd probably be alright overall as long as one sticks to local offices of foreign companies or overseas remote work for employment and lives in one of the bigger metros. Nobody really blinks an eye at foreigners in Tokyo any more for example, and during my past few visits I even had multiple people I interacted with assume I spoke Japanese on first interaction even though I'm very obviously a foreigner.
Not that everything would be rosy, of course. It won't be anywhere, it's all about which tradeoffs one is willing to make.
Nobody blinks an eye in Tokyo, but they will absolutely think you're 1) a tourist or 2) someone who moved as an adult. It says something that the mark of mastery of Japanese is when someone in Japan asks how long you've lived in Japan - which, if you were born there, is still insulting.
That people speak Japanese to you is more a sign of the general (in) ability and willingness to speak English in Japan.
Maybe, but in my experience it's something that changed over time. When I was first there about 15 years ago, the rate at which people would attempt to engage with English was higher and getting acknowledgement that you could understand and speak Japanese was more difficult. I think it might be better if "foreigner == English" isn't a prevailing assumption.
As an English speaking expat who has family overseas, a source of income which doesn't rely on your absolute conformity to society, the ability to befriend like minded young families locally, and someone who has a place to flee to in case of natural disaster, absolutely Japan sounds like a dream to raise a kid in. Basically combine the best of both worlds: benefit from the clean environment, the politeness of the Japanese people, the wonderful culture and rich history, with the freedoms we're used to from an individualistic society.
For those who don't have the privilege though, I can see why more people in JP than America have voted with their singleness/child free decisions or up and left.
Edit: and yes I would also sooner have kids in Japan, or indeed most OECD countries instead of America, for the reasons you outlined and for having the privileges I listed.
I imagine that for kids, having experience living both in Japan and somewhere else might be pretty valuable, so moving seems understandable. I’m curious about what the schools in Japan are like; I don’t think national average spending on education says very much about what it’s like for the kids.
It's a very strict, drill-style education system. There's an enormous amount of pressure on kids to work hard and get good grades, to the point that whole extra cram schools are open on weekday evenings which the vast majority have to go to in order to keep up with the expectations of perfect performance. Many students don't get enough sleep. After school clubs are numerous, but highly regimented (as has been mentioned elsewhere), and can be as stressful as school given how seriously members are expected to take participation.
And that's before we get into the aspects of not looking Japanese. Japan is not outwardly racist, but it's very suspicious of foreigners. I (an unassuming 20 year old at the time) would routinely sit down on the train or bus, and have people next to me stand up and find a seat further away. Children would stare. When I took my visiting parents to the zoo a Japanese child their parent asked "what are they?" referring to the white family having lunch. Friends who weren't living in cities for their years abroad found that they were ogled and followed around constantly by groups of curious girls and boys. I had to threaten a man to stop taking a video recording of my (ginger) sister who was just minding her own business in a market.
Japan is a wonderful country, with fascinating history, culture, food, and oftentimes genuinely wonderful and welcoming people. But it is not a comfortable place to be Different. School is already a difficult time for a lot of kids, and I sure as hell wouldn't want to put my daughter through the discomfort of going to school in Japan, and I say that as someone who absolutely loved my time there, and think that living and studying abroad is one of the best things a young person can do with their impressionable brain.
There are bits of schooling there that I think US schools should pick up, though, like students being required to help keep classrooms clean. That helps keep them from getting as messy in the first place and instills some level of appreciation for janitorial staff, which is a stark contrast to US schools where the classrooms regularly look like hurricane aftermath because the mess isn’t the kids’ or teachers’ problem. My dad spent many years working as a school janitor, so this one is close to me.
On the train, I feel that some degree of peoples’ willingness to sit next to a foreigner depends on how the foreigner carries themselves. I’m pretty visibly foreign and it’s rare that someone isn’t sitting next to me. I’m naturally a bit more quiet and reserved though, and I think that comes through in things like body language too.
Interesting. I thought young Japanese weren't starting families because of the extreme amount of time they are expected to be at work.
I'm skeptical of a lot of the speculation about Japan's fertility rate...because much of the developed world isn't that far off, and China and South Korea are even lower.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate
The replacement rate has to be over 2 for a population to not contract, and there aren't really any developed nations that are close, the US included.
Time at work could be the case, since the US probably has lower hours worked than Japan, which is lower than Korea, or it could be something completely different. Or, well, the state of cost of living around the world makes having a child a major financial handicap and eliminates time for leisure activities.
This is something of a tangent but in all the arguments about why birthrates are falling, a lot seem to boil down to "people want to have kids, but the circumstances make it difficult". What if a not insignificant number of people just don't want kids and have a much easier time now making that choice? Access to contraceptives, not living close to family (i.e. less nagging to make some grandkids), being able to retire without relying on your kids, access to a lot of other things you can be spending time doing that can feel just as fulfilling.
Don't get me wrong, I have kids, they're my favourite people in the world. Would kill or die for them. But raising children is one of the hardest jobs in the world. It is a HUGE life altering commitment, even with all the money and support in the world. I can see a lot of people just deciding it's not for them. I know it's not the only reason, but it's one I've rarely seen anyone talk about.
Tildes recently had a discussion around status being a cause of falling birthrates. I mentioned that Nordic countries provide unparalleled support to parents, but their fertility rates are still super low.
I want to have kids someday, but having them anytime soon would interfere with my ambitions. Furthermore, our cities aren't configured to make raising kids easy.
That's entirely a fair question to ask, and in fact is one that is asked.
2021 pew Research
56% of adults without kids said they just plain dont want any. But 43% cited other reasons: medical, financial, no partner, age, state of the world, climate change, partner doesn't want kids.
people want to have kids, but the circumstances make it difficult. There's probably no point pushing the 56%, but much can be done to encourage/facilitate the ~43%. In addition to nudging those already have kids to have more.
Edit: additional news article, 2024 japan
Wow 56% is higher than I would have expected. I wonder if we'd gone back 50, 100 years how many of those 56% would have had children because they didn't maybe have a choice. And if those 43% were somehow able to have children, would it be enough? Can they and others make up for those who don't want kids? Just hypothesising here, we'll probably never know. I can't help but think this pyramid scheme will fail one day and we should start designing a world which accommodate for that.
It's worth noting that's "A majority (56%) of non-parents younger than 50 who say it’s unlikely they will have children someday" (emphasis mine). If I'm reading the data correctly, that'd make the overall percentage of 18-49 year olds in the "just don't want kids" bucket about 12%.
Having actually worked in a
pyramid scheme"Multi-level marketing" company, that sounds harsh. And when fertility fails there's no re-designing the world, humanity will simply end within 80ish years.Anyway we only need slightly more than two kids per woman on average to replace and maintain our population. It can just be a rectangular prism if you like. With advances in reproductive medicine we actually only ever will need women to continue to species until we figure out wombs: gametogenesis for a woman to coax sperm cells from her cells. Average one per citizen would be enough.
Supporting some parents who do want kids so they can have more kids, to make up for all the others who don’t, seems like it might be pretty promising, in countries where immigration isn’t going to do it.
A problem is that families in conservative communities are most likely to fit that description, which invites distrust.
It's totally possible you're right. There is an argument that children are an inferior good as having children is inversely correlated with higher income levels. The revealed preference for many people is, given the choice, they'd rather not have children instead of making any compromises in their living standards or ideal for raising kids.
Edit: grammar
That reminds me of this YouTube short also by Shogo. It's only a minute long, but for those who hate the Shorts format: it's predicted that the next likely major earthquake will be in the Nankai Trough, and will have MAJOR consequences. Worst case scenario would be 320,000 people dying, and 220 trillion yen in damages, which currently translates to qbout 1.5 trillion USD. For comparison, the 2011 earthquake had around 10,000 people killed, injured or left missing.
There's actually an entire Wikipedia page for "Nankai Megathrust Earthquakes" with a section on future earthquakes, and links to previous earthquakes. Something Shogo didn't mention is that they tend to happen in pairs, with a year or two between them. And the second earthquake is usually just as strong as the first (only two on that list registered below 8.0, and one of those two is 7.9), so they'd have that hanging over their heads during reconstruction... Assuming they can. 1.5 trillion in damages to a highly populated area will be pretty devastating.
Ever since I saw that short last year, I've felt like Japan's days are numbered.
Numbered in what way? It'll definitely be devastating, but I don't see any reason to see it as the end of the country. It's literally a regular event, that's why the prediction is made with so much confidence. The last nankai earthquake happened DURING WW2. I'm sure they'll bounce back when not being reamed by the US navy as well.
The wiki also says they're taking steps to mitigate and have already dropped their projections for both death toll and damage pretty dramatically. Seems that they'll continue on this path and hopefully further mitigate any potential damage and death.
It's the sheer economic damages that make me wary. Trillion is one of those numbers we can't visualize because it's too big, and the immediate damages alone could hit 200 trillion yen. For comparison, this year's general budget is 112.57 trillion yen, which is the second-highest budget on record. If the worst case scenario DOES happen, it could become the most expensive natural disaster on record, which is currently held by the 2011 earthquake at 16.9 trillion yen/$360 billion.
I know Japan has suffered plenty of large earthquakes, but none that expensive, nor any with such a high potential death toll. 300,000 is no small number, especially given the 1944 and 1946 earthquakes didn't even total 3,000 casualties combined. Also remember that the landscape is very different from the 1940's, there's naturally been a lot more development since then which changes the scope of the damages.
Neither number are set in stone, especially with Japan taking preemptive action to mitigate damages. The potential is still pretty daunting to me, though. The most recent articles sourced on the Wikipedia page are from just last month, and seem to suggest that the current projected damages would be at least 200,000 deaths and 200 trillion yen if it were to happen right now. It may not destroy Japan, but I think at minimum, that would be devastating enough to trigger a large recession and economic crisis.
Japan has a looooooong history of being fucked by natural disasters then bouncing back. Humans are nothing if not resilient. We live in plenty of precarious places. The US has tornado alley, the Phillipines have typhoons, India has heatwaves. Japan isn't even in the top 20 for natural disaster risk (they're #28).