Japan's aging population could actually be good news
newscientist.com
Japan's aging population could actually be good news
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#2Interesting:
"Japan has the world's oldest population, with a median age of 46 years, an average lifespan of 84, and a quarter of the population over 65. "
That is a very old population!
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#3> But fewer people in future will mean it has more living space, more arable land per head, and a higher quality of life, says Eberstadt. Its demands on the planet for food and other resources will also lessen.
Different day, same Malthusian bullshit. These people can only think of humans as net negative parasites on the planet, rather than individual agents with a positive expected value to society. Density is GOOD — it leads to cross-pollination of ideas and the advancement of the world. Yes, the planet is on a path that will require us to eventually get smarter about resource consumption. Advocating fewer people on Earth is the most harmful & naive way to solve that problem.
If your life raft is sinking, do you try to patch it, or do you throw someone overboard? Your instinctual answer says a lot about the type of person you are.
[edit: I'd remove the last paragraph if it weren't intellectually dishonest to do so. I feel like it's causing people to miss my main point. It was written more out of anger than reason. Please ignore.]
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#41. Overcrowding in Japan is largely due to such a large percentage of the population congregating in Tokyo. If the Japanese economy (and thus population) were more decentralized, this wouldn't be such a big problem.
2. A lot of the reasons for the high cost of living has to do with protectionism. For example, the rice farmer lobby benefits from very high tariffs on imported rice. Most of the rice farmers are old men, so more young people (or the existing young people being more politically engaged) could actually help fix this problem.
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#5> But fewer people in future will mean it has more living space, more arable land per head, and a higher quality of life, says Eberstadt. Its demands on the planet for food and other resources will also lessen. Different day, same Malthusian bullshit. These people can only think of humans as net negative parasites on the planet, rather than individual agents with a positive expected value to society. Density is GOOD…
Honest question: What population do you find excessive and too much for the Earth to be able to sustain it?.
By the way, Japan is not throwing people to the sea, just not replacing the ones that pass away, quite a big difference IMHO.
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#6> But fewer people in future will mean it has more living space, more arable land per head, and a higher quality of life, says Eberstadt. Its demands on the planet for food and other resources will also lessen. Different day, same Malthusian bullshit. These people can only think of humans as net negative parasites on the planet, rather than individual agents with a positive expected value to society. Density is GOOD…
> If your life raft is sinking, do you try to patch it, or do you throw someone overboard? Your instinctual answer says a lot about the type of person you are.
Nobody is being thrown overboard. The article is just pointing out that it may not necessarily be catastrophic if population growth slows or even reverses for a time. We're all just speculating, whether you agree or disagree.
In support of the article, slower population growth would reduce resource consumption. Rampant population growth would speed up the resource depletion process. As certain crucial resources become more scarce, conflict is likely to follow. It'd only be a matter of time before large scale war followed, perhaps leading to an extinction event.
There are definite positives and negatives to slowing growth rates, but I think there are probably more positives if we're talking about a gradual slowing (as opposed to a sudden tanking). We can do a lot more with a lot less today. Many of us don't need massive families anymore, and that's OK.
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#7> But fewer people in future will mean it has more living space, more arable land per head, and a higher quality of life, says Eberstadt. Its demands on the planet for food and other resources will also lessen. Different day, same Malthusian bullshit. These people can only think of humans as net negative parasites on the planet, rather than individual agents with a positive expected value to society. Density is GOOD…
> If your life raft is sinking, do you try to patch it, or do you throw someone overboard? Your instinctual answer says a lot about the type of person you are. Nobody is being thrown overboard. The article is just pointing out that it may not necessarily be catastrophic if population growth slows or even reverses for a time. We're all just speculating, whether you agree or disagree. In support of the article, slower…
A fertility rate of 1.4 is not a slowing of growth. It means population is shrinking. If you think of individuals as net negative for society, you probably think this is a good thing. I do not.
Fewer people means fewer ideas. Resource consumption is a problem with our current technological base - but it has ALWAYS been a problem, and a solution has always been developed that results in higher overall quality of life. Agriculture was the technology that allowed more than a few hundred thousand humans to live on the planet. Humanity has a pretty good track record of coming up with the next tech in plenty of time.
Panglossian? Maybe. But I'd rather be Pangloss (syphilis and all) than a misanthrope like Ehrlich or Malthus.
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#8> But fewer people in future will mean it has more living space, more arable land per head, and a higher quality of life, says Eberstadt. Its demands on the planet for food and other resources will also lessen. Different day, same Malthusian bullshit. These people can only think of humans as net negative parasites on the planet, rather than individual agents with a positive expected value to society. Density is GOOD…
Honest question: What population do you find excessive and too much for the Earth to be able to sustain it?. By the way, Japan is not throwing people to the sea, just not replacing the ones that pass away, quite a big difference IMHO.
Morally, yes there's a huge difference. In terms of long-term economic, technological, and societal impact? Not really.
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#9Here's the problem I see with both population decline and life extension: lots of research indicates that the creative peak happens from 20-40 or so. Geniuses rarely continue to be the same level of productive after that. In other words, progress is probably better served by giving two people the chance to live 50 years than one person the chance to live 100, though resource consumption is about the same. An aging society, one without new generations of people with new ideas, is not a vital and creative one. Progress is served by turnover.
Re: Japan's aging population could actually be good news
#10> But fewer people in future will mean it has more living space, more arable land per head, and a higher quality of life, says Eberstadt. Its demands on the planet for food and other resources will also lessen. Different day, same Malthusian bullshit. These people can only think of humans as net negative parasites on the planet, rather than individual agents with a positive expected value to society. Density is GOOD…
A positive contribution to society and a positive contribution to the planet aren't necessarily the same. Sure, more intellectuals mean faster societal development. That doesn't take away from the pressure an increased population places on our limited natural resources.