An assistant professor at one of the most prestigious universities in the U.S. has said that the “clear solution” to Japan’s aging society is for “mass suicide and mass ‘seppuku’ (ritual disembowelment) of the elderly”.
But seriously, I feel like this is the broad sentiment of Japanese and the non-Japanese alike. Anti- immigration right applaud Japan for “keeping their country theirs” (as if ethnic Japanese aren’t the ones who came later and displaced the local Ainus already living there), and not going on supposed national suicide, unlike the West. Not having enough babies is tantamount to suicide anyway. The narrative then becomes: either allow immigration and go on national and cultural suicide; or don’t allow immigration and not have enough babies, which is still considered national suicide. Either way is committing national suicide.
I am not naive to think that immigration has no baggage; but at the same time, if countries want to increase birth rate, then increase the wages and standard of living for young people and families to encourage more people to marry and raise families. However, the elites aren’t going to do the former because they don’t want to disappoint their shareholders. If they don’t want to do that, then allow more immigration, which they also don’t want to do.
Orrrr (and this applies to most western countries in the near future too) they could maybe kinda consider not creating conditions in which its fucking impossible to have kids?
As someone in a western country now inconceivable! Heck we still have a good portion of Americans who complain about the living standards but will stay home in November or actively vote for things like deporting immigrants like that magically fixes the over arching problem
56 is the median age for home buyers in 2025 and it’s been this way for a very long time.
We’re as doomed as Japan honestly we just happen to encourage immigration lol. So I agree with you.
Look at the median age of first-time homebuyers, it’s less skewed. Many people make more than one home purchase in a lifetime, including whan they buy smaller places when they’re old in order to downsize, or when they buy into a retirement community.
For a lot of people, delaying to settle down and have family is a choice (like for myself), but you are right that conditions are being created to dis-incentivise raising a family.
“Squandered” is carrying lots of baggage there, in particular the assumptions that population growth is a good thing, that it’s sustainable, and that the average person will be better off in a positive-growth scenario. None of those are proven. And the assumption that population reduction is bad is often because measures such as GDP (which is approximately proportional to population) drops if population does. But aggregate GDP is not the appropriate measure in such a case.
I completely sympathize with the Japanese view about immigration. Their society has a lot going for it which is held up by the culture. And diversity would lead to a tragedy of the commons in many cases, like keeping public spaces clean.
However, sacrificing your elders is not exactly Japan’s culture either.
The “tragedy of the commons” was an economic thought experiment involving unmanged commons. Learn the history of how commons were actually managed through history and you’ll draw a different conclusion.
Also, don’t let the rich expropriate the commons like they did in the UK in the late 17th and all the 18th centuries. That causes all kinds of social problems, including mass (sometimes coerced) emigration.
I do understand that the words “tragedy of the commons” are not some magic spell that causes any shared resource to become degraded, perforce, always. I am familiar with the origin of the phrase and how it is used/misused.
I use it only in situations where I do believe that the shared resource would be spoiled, and not simply by virtue of its being shared.
The public cleanliness in Japan would be seriously degraded and there would be significant resentment over it. Even conscientious Japanese would stop trying. It would be an actual tragedy of the commons, not just a nominal tragedy of the commons.
Oh yes! Anything but immigration!
But seriously, I feel like this is the broad sentiment of Japanese and the non-Japanese alike. Anti- immigration right applaud Japan for “keeping their country theirs” (as if ethnic Japanese aren’t the ones who came later and displaced the local Ainus already living there), and not going on supposed national suicide, unlike the West. Not having enough babies is tantamount to suicide anyway. The narrative then becomes: either allow immigration and go on national and cultural suicide; or don’t allow immigration and not have enough babies, which is still considered national suicide. Either way is committing national suicide.
I am not naive to think that immigration has no baggage; but at the same time, if countries want to increase birth rate, then increase the wages and standard of living for young people and families to encourage more people to marry and raise families. However, the elites aren’t going to do the former because they don’t want to disappoint their shareholders. If they don’t want to do that, then allow more immigration, which they also don’t want to do.
Orrrr (and this applies to most western countries in the near future too) they could maybe kinda consider not creating conditions in which its fucking impossible to have kids?
As someone in a western country now inconceivable! Heck we still have a good portion of Americans who complain about the living standards but will stay home in November or actively vote for things like deporting immigrants like that magically fixes the over arching problem
56 is the median age for home buyers in 2025 and it’s been this way for a very long time.
We’re as doomed as Japan honestly we just happen to encourage immigration lol. So I agree with you.
Look at the median age of first-time homebuyers, it’s less skewed. Many people make more than one home purchase in a lifetime, including whan they buy smaller places when they’re old in order to downsize, or when they buy into a retirement community.
The median age of first-time home buyers is 35, according to this: https://www.financialsamurai.com/the-median-homebuyer-age-is-now-so-old/
National Association of Realtors gives a slightly higher number.
For a lot of people, delaying to settle down and have family is a choice (like for myself), but you are right that conditions are being created to dis-incentivise raising a family.
I think South Korea could provide a model to encourage more birth rate. They created a new administrative capital city where it is more family oriented. The result? Explosion in birth rate. In the following years, other places replicated the model and South Korea as a whole experienced more birth this year for the first time in nine years.
The problem is already well underway in the west. Some potential growth has already been squandered, acting now is an emergency.
“Squandered” is carrying lots of baggage there, in particular the assumptions that population growth is a good thing, that it’s sustainable, and that the average person will be better off in a positive-growth scenario. None of those are proven. And the assumption that population reduction is bad is often because measures such as GDP (which is approximately proportional to population) drops if population does. But aggregate GDP is not the appropriate measure in such a case.
Yeah, plus consider how many people already learn Japanese as it’s considered to be a sexy language in many countries
I completely sympathize with the Japanese view about immigration. Their society has a lot going for it which is held up by the culture. And diversity would lead to a tragedy of the commons in many cases, like keeping public spaces clean.
However, sacrificing your elders is not exactly Japan’s culture either.
The “tragedy of the commons” was an economic thought experiment involving unmanged commons. Learn the history of how commons were actually managed through history and you’ll draw a different conclusion.
Also, don’t let the rich expropriate the commons like they did in the UK in the late 17th and all the 18th centuries. That causes all kinds of social problems, including mass (sometimes coerced) emigration.
I do understand that the words “tragedy of the commons” are not some magic spell that causes any shared resource to become degraded, perforce, always. I am familiar with the origin of the phrase and how it is used/misused.
I use it only in situations where I do believe that the shared resource would be spoiled, and not simply by virtue of its being shared.
The public cleanliness in Japan would be seriously degraded and there would be significant resentment over it. Even conscientious Japanese would stop trying. It would be an actual tragedy of the commons, not just a nominal tragedy of the commons.