Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

South Korea Is over [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#11

Post by godsinhisheaven »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #4

I wonder why immigration was not mentioned as a measure to alleviate the issue.

I think part of it is, as the youth numbers decline, the culture declines with it. This is addressed in the video, people >18 and <40 are those who keep traditions and culture alive. If you somehow imported a bunch of babies who were raised in Korean families, Korean culture survives, and if you import a bunch of 60+ people, well they're not going to be spreading their culture as much as someone who is 30. But babies and the elderly aren't the ones immigrating all that much, it's the (relatively) young singles and families. If you somehow managed to keep up the current population of SK by importing only young Thai families, within 4 generations SK would be North Thailand. I think is only a small part of why many countries are resistant to immigration, and on the micro-level, it's as simple as asking, do you want more neighbors? Or less? And I think, generalizing greatly, most people would say less.

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#12

Post by 9283409232 »

You're seeing similar things in many different countries. The ruling class doesn't quite understand it. If people can barely support themselves, then the logical thing to do is to not have children. You can incentivize child birth all you want with economic carrots but the fundamental problem remains. Japan has a similar problem that South Korea does, the US is starting to see a similar problem with a birth rate of 1.6-1.7. Not having children is just the logical choice.

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#13

Post by bryanlarsen »

rich_sasha wrote: post #8
brap wrote: post #2

Genuinely asking - what if every person was held accountable to save for their own retirement, instead of relying on the taxpayer? Would a shrinkage still cause economic collapse? Seems like the core issue is that we have a system in place that only works when young >> old

> Would a shrinkage still cause economic collapse? Sort of maybe yes. Even when you save up the cash up front, you live off return on the investments. Of course you can invest globally, but wherever you invest, you rely on there being a young productive workforce to generate said return on investment. Ultimately, cash is a nice abstraction, but you need someone doing the actual doing - harvest food, run hospitals, fi…

Exactly. No matter how much you have saved up, inflation can destroy it. If you need nursing care and there aren't enough nurses, they can set their own price. The overall inflation might not be bad because stuff like housing gets cheaper with a shrinking population, but if what you need is in short demand, you will pay more.

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#14

Post by yobbo »

brap wrote: post #2

Genuinely asking - what if every person was held accountable to save for their own retirement, instead of relying on the taxpayer? Would a shrinkage still cause economic collapse? Seems like the core issue is that we have a system in place that only works when young >> old

It's not about money per se, which can be printed etc. It's about missing supply of services and to some extent products.

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#15

Post by redbell »

Watched it a few days ago, and this comment kept ringing in my head for a while:

South Korean here, We are all aware of the problem, and the government is virtually doing nothing. Wish us good luck!

(Edit)

I see many people saying don't depend on government. As a father and a husband myself, of course I'm concerned for the future which my son will have to live... But those numbers are not without structural problems. People don't just give up having children, they are forced to. In this kind of situation, the government definitely has a role to play. One of the problems would be overwhelming meritocracy just as M.Sendel said, accustomed with high inequailty, politically/genderly polarized society, etc. Please do not try to judge phenomenon without knowing its causes. :)

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#16

Post by yobbo »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #6

I'm horrified to even ask, but does war typically act as a correcting factor?

Not really unless it somehow leads to fundamental regime change which can "disrupt" the various conditions described in the video. (Remove from power all the beneficiaries of current policies and replace them with better alternatives. Not easy ...)

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#18

Post by yongjik »

brap wrote: post #2

Genuinely asking - what if every person was held accountable to save for their own retirement, instead of relying on the taxpayer? Would a shrinkage still cause economic collapse? Seems like the core issue is that we have a system in place that only works when young >> old

Young people will take less financial risks, because if your bet does not pay off and you lose all your money, you starve. Which means less purchase, fewer companies founded, less demand for existing companies, and worse economy.

Even worse, some young people will still take financial risks, their bets do not pay off, and they become the penniless old, who only have their own kids to look after them. These young people are now stacked with debt, having to pay off money they've never even seen. Again, worse economy, and more misery.

In the long term, society is shaped by its people. If enough people decide "I'll take care of myself, and others should do the same," then that's the society you get - one mistake or accident and your life is ruined. There's your personal responsibility, choose wisely.

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#19

Post by everforward »

brap wrote: post #2

Genuinely asking - what if every person was held accountable to save for their own retirement, instead of relying on the taxpayer? Would a shrinkage still cause economic collapse? Seems like the core issue is that we have a system in place that only works when young >> old

How do you handle the transition? Either the changes aren’t retroactive and the transitional generations have to fund their own retirement and the grandfathered folks, or they are retroactive and the elderly are either destitute or again supported by people funding their own retirement.

It would be an immense cost on those transitional generations. It seems terrible for the economy. Workers now have to save more of their paychecks, but also need compounding growth on stocks to make retirement feasible.

Re: South Korea Is over [video]

#20

Post by pcthrowaway »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #6

I'm horrified to even ask, but does war typically act as a correcting factor?

I think for some questions of resource scarcity, it can. Specifically this would apply to housing and material possessions (because war can decrease the population)

When the resources which are scarce are young, able-bodied workers who can caretake for the elderly while tilling the fields, I imagine war would exacerbate the problem.

Well, traditionally this would be the case anyway. In the modern age of warfare where civilians are killed with impunity, I imagine the casualty among non-combatants tracks population demographics more generally. So if there are twice as many people over the age of 60 as there are under 20 (for context, the population of these two groups was roughly equal starting in 2024 in the U.S.[1]), then one could imagine twice as many people in that age group dying. Perhaps more if population groups are required to relocate periodically to avoid bombings (as we've seen in Gaza) where the elderly are less capable of walking distances than the young.

[1]: https://www.populationpyramid.net/united-states-of-america/2...

Post reply on HN