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

What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

konichivalue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 201 posts

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#141

Post by happytoexplain »

Tor3 wrote: post #93
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #4

They’ll find it easy to keep their homogenous culture and shared traditional values. Why would the solution to “our people aren’t having enough babies” be “we should import different people to have their babies here”? Why does ever single bleeding heart liberal globalist try and ignore the deep psychological truths about human tribalism? It’s not even a bad thing, but even if it was, it’s a fact.

>They’ll find it easy to keep their homogenous culture and shared traditional values. That idea is a fallacy. It has never been true. All of Europe was always a melting pot for people from everywhere. Over the centuries people kept moving, immigrating and emigrating. England.. Britons, Celts, Anglo-Saxxon, Norse, Normans (which were themselves originally immigrants). And my own country? Surnames from everywhere. 40%…

So then it's ok to uproot the flower and replace it with another one, because "it was going to change anyway"? Analogies are a distraction.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#142

Post by happytoexplain »

porkloin wrote: post #95
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #4

They’ll find it easy to keep their homogenous culture and shared traditional values. Why would the solution to “our people aren’t having enough babies” be “we should import different people to have their babies here”? Why does ever single bleeding heart liberal globalist try and ignore the deep psychological truths about human tribalism? It’s not even a bad thing, but even if it was, it’s a fact.

The idea that Japan is a uniquely "homogeneous culture" is honestly a modern construct anyway. Japanese culture and language has been enormously influenced by colonial and migrant presence in the country, from Chinese to Dutch to British to American, and a zillion others. Just look at the language! I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but I remember when taking Japanese language courses that something like 3…

I think you're misunderstanding - "homogeneous" as a cultural description is a spatial metric, not a time metric. Homogeneous cultures indeed change across time, influenced by war and foreign media/languages, just like any culture. The point is not that they do or do not change, the point is that they do so together, largely.

>The country _does_ have a really notable cohesion and shared identity

This, and race/culture, is what is meant when people say Japan is homogeneous compared to other developed nations.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#143

Post by malicka »

kmijyiyxfbklao wrote: post #134
malicka wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the deep psychological truths about human tribalism … that the races should keep to themselves? Yea, I’m going to have to disagree on this one. This was pretty handily disproven by the New World. Mixing, sharing, cohabiting… this creates culture and makes us stronger. Isolation, protectionism, and fear makes us weak.

How was it disproven by the New World? The countries that mixed (Latin America) are weaker than the country that didn't (USA)

The USA is pretty dang diverse, and definitely mixed. That mixing is a core part of it’s culture and history, actually. And now, the country that mixed (USA) is stronger than the Old World that didn’t (Europe).

Which is to say: There is no inherent psychological tribalism that makes having a diverse country impossible or ruinous; rather, this tribalism is manufactured and spread by hatemongers. The New World is a very good case study, here.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#144

Post by chaostheory »

HerbManic wrote: post #119
chaostheory wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it takes 18 years to create an adult and nothing other than immigration is working at the moment. If any country was truly serious about this problem, they would end social programs for the elderly and focus that funding for families.

This is one of those thing, yes that is a true statement but what do you do with that information? Would you be willing to make that call? Looks like the trolley problem in action.

Yes, because otherwise your economy and country collapse sooner or later. ie everyone dies. Why do think homogenous countries like Japan and South Korea are finally opening up the immigration floodgates? Because there’s currently no other choice. The other options (directly lowering the costs of child care, lowering work hours, robots, et al) still haven’t worked. Immigration buys you time.

If you don’t want immigration, but you still want to buy time then you have to end socialist entitlement programs for the elderly.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#145

Post by moi2388 »

Erem wrote: post #123
Ekaros wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are forgetting the natives who royally massively got screwed. Perfect example why they should have done everything possible to stop migration.

That analogy doesn't work well. Their situation involved foreign powers enforcing jurisdiction and property claims over their land with a regular standing army; a completely different situation than modern immigration

Yes. Now it’s through a judicial army based on criminalising speech, and instead of based on a country, based on a religion.

Because that’s so much better

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#146

Post by ponector »

Tor3 wrote: post #78
seandoe wrote: post #43

Make having kids a zero-cost endeavor. If that doesn't do it, make it a profitable one. It's as simple as that.

It is not as simple as that. In my country giving birth is free. And you get economic support for every child. For most people it's still an economic burden to some extent, but for the majority it's not something which blocks them from having children. It's more that most families I know are content with having two children. It feels fine to them. But that's the families that do have children. 25% of men in my countr…

It is as simply as that. Economic support you mentioned is never enough to cover basic needs. Better than nothing, but still require to sacrifice a lot to have an extra kid.

More kids means you need a bigger house, bigger car, extra furniture, a part time job for mother to manage kids.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#148

Post by jalapenoj »

TheDong wrote: post #79
seandoe wrote: post #43

Make having kids a zero-cost endeavor. If that doesn't do it, make it a profitable one. It's as simple as that.

Children cost hundred's of thousands of dollars to raise, and that doesn't even count the opportunity cost of your own career progression as you have to spend a year of sleepless nights and possibly have one or both parents reduce their work hours to care for the child. The Japanese government already struggles to pay out pensions with its aging population, healthcare and pension costs are both rising, where do you p…

No, slash the entitlements, children become the pension. You can’t solve this with taxes because those come from the youth anyway.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#149

Post by krapp »

hagbard_c wrote: post #132
krapp wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man this thread is like catnip for racists.

Xenophobes, not racists. There is no race called 'muslim'. That this thread attracts comments from those who have migration-related problems high on their agenda is not that strange since it is dealing with the problems of the (absence of) migration. This subject has been polarised - not in the least by people calling anyone who does not agree a 'racist' - so some of the comments are extreme as well, viz. the grandpa…

Lol. "xenophobes not racists" gives the same energy as "it isn't pedophilia, it's ephebophilia."

Go jerk off to a Roman statue or something.

Re: What happens if Japan takes in zero immigrants?

#150

Post by Erem »

moi2388 wrote: post #145
Erem wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That analogy doesn't work well. Their situation involved foreign powers enforcing jurisdiction and property claims over their land with a regular standing army; a completely different situation than modern immigration

Yes. Now it’s through a judicial army based on criminalising speech, and instead of based on a country, based on a religion. Because that’s so much better

I certainly don't understand all you're saying through this tortured analogy, but yes an "army" of judges that issue rulings is much, much better than an army of soldiers that issue killings
Post reply on HN