[rcme]

I always find it weird that people lament population decline. Japan still has a lot of people. Sure, that number is going down now, but you can’t look at the trend and extrapolate that number down to zero. And as the population declines, the number of resources per citizen increases. So people may be better off than before. The largest dangers to Japanese society lie in the transition period, where many elderly people will need to be supported by relatively fewer working age people.

[Tor3]

The problem is that the transition period is not a transition period, as long as the birthrate is too low the population will continue to be age-heavy, and that will always be a problem. As for resources, Japan's resources are of the type which need people to work them (seafood, rice, other agriculture, and industry). So a population decline just makes it worse. They already have problems with rice fields, even with machinery and automation - a lot of rice fields are run by very old people at this point. The resources just aren't there for the picking for those left, to put it that way.

[Gud]

In theory, isn't the problem actually that older people are unable to work? What if we are on the brink of reversing the aging process, thus bringing the elderly back into the work force? OK, I understand it sounds a bit dystopian.

I'm just thinking there might be more solutions to consider than "make more children". Automation, robotic assistance, age reversal etc.

[smrq]

If humanity can't figure out how to handle population decline, then it's doomed, full stop. There's only so much planet to go around; there's a finite limit somewhere. Rather than treating population decline as the issue, perhaps focusing on the actual issues that it exposes would be prudent. As it is now, we're just making every new generation into a layer of a global pyramid scheme.

[dragonwriter]

> If humanity can't figure out how to handle population decline, then it's doomed, full stop.

If it is going to enter a state of perpetual decline, then it is doomed, full stop.

> There's only so much planet to go around; there's a finite limit somewhere.

Perhaps, but the existence of an asymptote to growth doesn't imply a need to ever switch to decline.

The normal shape of a resource constrained growth curve is logistic.

[RestlessMind]

> Japan still has a lot of people.

But what type of people? Are they dependents (old, children, disabled) or independent ones who can support the rest of the society? If the ratio of workers : dependents gets unhealthy, a society is doomed. In spite of all the technological progress, we still need humans for a lot of things - long term care, food, entertainment, security etc. If there are no young people, who is going to do all that?

[lm28469]

> I always find it weird that people lament population decline.

> The largest dangers to Japanese society lie in the transition period, where many elderly people will need to be supported by relatively fewer working age people.

You answered your own question.

In a lot of countries the working population pays the pensions, more pensioners and less workers = more stress on the workers. In the long run it's good but it's going to suck ass for a few generations

And that's not even talking about the logistic of taking care of elders, it gets either very expensive or very time consuming, or both. For example in France it costs about $3k a month to have a small room in a shitty retirement house that is already overcrowded and understaffed

[red-iron-pine]

> For example in France it costs about $3k a month to have a small room in a shitty retirement house that is already overcrowded and understaffed

my grandmother had Alzheimer's and her care, in rural WA, was around $9000/month USD. Reasonably new building but still pretty understaffed.

[yongjik]

> And as the population declines, the number of resources per citizen increases. So people may be better off than before.

Japan's resource is its people. Engineers, teachers, government officers, train conductors, and so on. When population declines, the Japanese don't have more resources per people. They just have less resources, period.