Japan’s lost generation is still jobless and living with their parents

Post by plutonorm » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 9:54 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #250

plutonorm wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poverty would be fine if I had the chance to work on what I want to work on. All I need is a computer for my work. I could work on mathematics, physics, I could write a novel. I could read academic papers day in day out, gorge on information. It would be wonderful.

In other words: Yes, your hobby is cheap. You only have to buy a computer every once in a while, though you'll run into trouble the moment it gets too out of date or breaks. Poverty doesn't allow you to replace such things. Lots of hobbies require investment. I do art: more specifically, draw and paint, both of which require supplies. My mother sews, but that requires material and making a shirt is more expensive tha…

Post by imtringued » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 11:52 PM UTC

asdasdasdas5453 wrote: post #42

brazzy wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how economy works. There is no such thing in general as "too many people for the economy". "The economy" is the sum of goods and services produced and consumed. Everyone who lives consumes, and could easily consume more. The economy is generally limited by the ability to produce, and is generally limited by the number of working-age people to do the producing. Unemployment can be result of production being…

On HN when people discuss CS/privacy/programming the conversation is very thorough and interesting. When the discussion is about economics (the topic I have studied at uni) most comments are just plain wrong and show a complete ignorance about the topic. If one wants a counter argument to "too many people for the economy" one can start here : https://www.jstor.org/stable/2523702?seq=1 "Using data from the Current Pop…

Post by kevin_b_er » Sun, Oct 04, 2020, 1:31 AM UTC

pembrook wrote: post #179

alexashka wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd need to make a compelling reason for incentivizing it if anything. Western countries are incentivized by corporate interests. Corporate interests don't care for children because they get in the way of profits. You'd need someone who can rise above corporate interests to do things like health care, children, human rights, etc.

> Corporate interests don't care for children because they get in the way of profits. Baloney. People having more children is the dream scenario for all business--more children = more consumers = more economic growth. This has nothing to do with some evil corporate boogeyman. Just look at the data. There's a direct correlation between rising standards of living and having less children. This is because, if you give h…

Post by nradov » Sun, Oct 04, 2020, 7:36 AM UTC

bsanr2 wrote: post #325

fearn077 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your fix for technology enabled social distance was more technology. I love it. Perhaps social media has done that to some people. But I still see my neighbors out in their garden, and even outside with musical instruments. My musical friends come over and play outside with me. I garden alone because socializing over everything is insane to me. I disagree there’s a real problem. Re: people living at home still. That…

We need to start thinking about what happens when those people die and our incredibly permissive inheritance laws allow them to pass down literal trillions to... basically a bunch of 50, 60, and 70 year olds. Especially since a lot of that inheritance is going to be stakes in critical businesses that the heirs are in no way, shape, or form qualified to run.

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 04, 2020, 1:45 PM UTC

ornornor wrote: post #336

jokethrowaway wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, but I'm not sure we're aware of this problem as a society. People still think that people making 6 figures are the elite and cheer every time a progressive income tax targeting someone marginally richer than them is introduced by their government. They are not the enemy, they're not the people lobbying the government so their business can make extra millions or avoid paying taxes with loopholes. The…

> People still think that people making 6 figures are the elite and cheer every time a progressive income tax targeting someone marginally richer than them is introduced by their government ... in the US. The world extends slightly beyond the US of A, where your statement doesn’t necessarily apply.