191–200 of 239 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Optical regression score: "All over the place worse than my darts game after a few pints of gin" Though, often a rank vs. rank scatter plot is more enlightening than a scatter plot of the raw data.
pints of gin?!
It would have been good to see an x-y plot of living with parents vs. fertility. Eyeballing the maps he showed, I don't see a great correlation. Scandinavia has mediocre fertility compared to the rest of Europe, but the lowest percentage living with their parents. Other nations like Greece do satisfy his hypothesis, but a real test would be to plot those two percentages on an x-y plot and see how well they correlate…
So, maybe we just see wealth as a the root cause at play
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If I were a woman, there is no way I would entertain the idea of having kids without my name on the title or lease of the house. There's lots of prosperous countries where renting is very common, is well-regulated, and not some great risk (Germany and Switzerland spring to mind). I, too, live in a country where owning is the norm. That turns the rental market into (mostly) shabby flats for the very lowest income br…
Sorry, but no. The well regulated rental market in Germany has had the consequence of a housing unit shortage. Try renting anything in well regulated Berlin. It's like trying to find an PS5/ RTX 3080 during the scalpocalipse. Similar in well regulated Stockholm. Renting is very popular in Germany because buying is out of reach for most due to how expensive it is, therefore those who aren't well off have no other choi…
In general, capital cities in Europe are extremely expensive, no matter whether we are talking about well-regulated Berlin or less-regulated Rome.
These two maps, taken in conjunction, do not provide a good argument for housing deregulation. Even if we accept that the maps correlate quite well (and ignore whether there is any causal link), there is an assumption that the author is not stating plainly: that housing deregulation leads to young people being able to move out of their parent’s basement. Look at the Scandinavian, very deep green countries at the top…
The missing part is that the Scandinavian countries are high income-countries and have a lower population density, e.g.:
- Sweden: 25.4 inhabitants per km2
- Italy: 206 per Km2
(Both according to Google).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, but no. The well regulated rental market in Germany has had the consequence of a housing unit shortage. Try renting anything in well regulated Berlin. It's like trying to find an PS5/ RTX 3080 during the scalpocalipse. Similar in well regulated Stockholm. Renting is very popular in Germany because buying is out of reach for most due to how expensive it is, therefore those who aren't well off have no other choi…
Berlin as a yardstick is very problematic. The western part used to be an economic backwater and for a long time after reunification, the city hardly attracted people to live there. It's only in the last 15y that Berlin has been growing like crazy. In general, capital cities in Europe are extremely expensive, no matter whether we are talking about well-regulated Berlin or less-regulated Rome.
And the issue with Berlin isn't that renting is expensive, it's that you can't find anything decent at all. Properties disappear off websites within minutes due to over demand, and then, once you finally manage find something, you have to do a visit with 200 other people with a folder in hand with a lot of your private information, and pray to your lucky star that you'll be that one in 200 people to get it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, and it's bad that china will depopulate? Won't every nation, eventually? Are you making like a "suffering / loss of life is bad" argument? It's hard to disagree with that, if you are. (I certainly don't.) I think you're deriding my use of "Carrying capacity" as an archaic concept, but your retort is that we're "creating ecosystems." But, every organism within an ecosystem "creates" it just by existing as part o…
Thank you. I appreciate your reply. As an aside: Would it be possible to favourite a reply? I have only figured out how to do that with submissions.
These two maps, taken in conjunction, do not provide a good argument for housing deregulation. Even if we accept that the maps correlate quite well (and ignore whether there is any causal link), there is an assumption that the author is not stating plainly: that housing deregulation leads to young people being able to move out of their parent’s basement. Look at the Scandinavian, very deep green countries at the top…
>I don’t know what the author has against housing regulations but this argument is missing some part. The missing part is that the Scandinavian countries are high income-countries and have a lower population density, e.g.: - Sweden: 25.4 inhabitants per km2 - Italy: 206 per Km2 (Both according to Google).
My point is that the author is trying to make an argument for deregulation of the housing market. Yet he is failing to actually state his argument.
How exactly do these two maps support an argument for deregulation?
And how do your two data points support it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Less people isn't a bad thing as long as the demographic distribution within the smaller population is healthy- meaning it is shaped like a pyramid, a wide base of young and working age people and smaller numbers of old people non-working people on the top. The problem for many first world countries today is that their populations are shaped like upside down pyramids- many old people and people nearing retirement age…
Part of my question would be how to deal with the pyramid. The pyramid should get less pronounced as time goes on as birth rates normalize. Basic human needs industries like clothing, food and shelter should't need that many people to support the retired. Health care may need some intervention. I guess part of the problem is maybe some of this is too much like socialism and/or being able to give non-working persons a…
One of the major issues faced by the Nordic countries is that healthcare workers are quitting ing large numbers and starting to take direct action like strikes in order to improve working conditions.
In Denmark and Finland there was direct government intervention when nurses went on strike (or threatened in Finland's case); a highly unconventional move considering the fact that both countries grant workers the right to use strikes as a tool in collective bargaining. Both the Danish and the Finnish governments are lead by Social Democrats, the political movement traditionally directly connected with the labour unions.
That taken into account, the health care sector doesn't just need some intervention. It requires large-scale restructuring in order to make it a more attractive sector to work in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While it has its issues, I'm not altogether convinced that the nuclear family is a bad thing. We seem to function best at tribal scale. Jokes aside, most family units are functional. Family scales well. Large-enough families invite dysfunction jokes, but they have a shared genetic interest. You can always coerce or compel family to do things like share resources or settle disputes against their own self-interest. Mor…
> You can always coerce or compel family to do things like share resources or settle disputes against their own self-interest. Huh?
These two maps, taken in conjunction, do not provide a good argument for housing deregulation. Even if we accept that the maps correlate quite well (and ignore whether there is any causal link), there is an assumption that the author is not stating plainly: that housing deregulation leads to young people being able to move out of their parent’s basement. Look at the Scandinavian, very deep green countries at the top…
Buying is still possible, but the prices are extremely inflated due to the Swedish habit of simply not paying of their mortages and just pay the interest. Last time I heard, the Stockholm housing bubble is about to burst due to the increasing interest rates, potentially collapsing the Swedish housing market.
The Finnish housing market is cooler, but finding an apartment in the Helsinki or Turku areas is not easy, and they don't come cheap. Just like in the case of Stockholm, people with below-average income are more or less kept out of the city cores.
From what I've been told, it sounds like the situation in Denmark and Norway is similar.