Japan PM says country on the brink over falling birth rate

[Hanaguma]

14 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I doubt anything is going to make Japanese women decide that popping out children equals a good life. They have emerged from a patriarchal society where they were subservient to husbands and IMO they ain't going back to it. I don't blame them in the slightest.

 

As for having babies, if men had to carry them around for 9 months with morning sickness, stretch marks, etc IMO the human race would have died out long ago.

If I were to wake up a fertile woman one day, no way would any man get to impregnate me- no sex without a certificate of vasectomy and a recent test.

I've actually seen loads of women giving birth as part of my job, and nothing about it is worth it IMO.

If you think Japanese women are subservient to their husbands, you haven't met very many Japanese women!  (my wife included). Women run the consumer economy here nearly 100%.  

 

 I think a lot would happily be stay home mothers if their husbands weren't worked to death by their employers.  

[Longwood50]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

Simple solution:  Increase immigration.  Japan would have no problem finding young, hard working people willing to work on long-term or permanent visas.  Language would be a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

So your solution is to cede your country to others.  A country is defined by three things, borders, language, and culture.  What you are suggesting is for the Japanese who have built their nation into one of the most powerful economies in the world to pass that inheritance on to those who did nothing to build it but enjoy the benefits. 

The solution lies with encouraging rather than discouraging people to have children.  Society has placed huge financial burdens on those who chose to have children.  Basic law of economics, you penalize something you get less of it, you subsidize it and you get more of it. 

The Chinese with a population explosion problem imposed a 1 child law.  They severely punished those who had more than 1 child robbing them and the children of benefits.  The Japanese should do the opposite.  Preferential benefits going to those in Japan that choose to have families.  Now this would be really controversial but those who are the best, brightest, and most successful should receive the largest incentive to have children.  Do you want to poplulate your country with the progeny of two parents who are both cardiothorasic surgeons, or two parents who are high school drop outs living on welfare. 

 

 

[Hanaguma]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO the answer is not ever more people- planet earth is being destroyed by too many.

If we were able to build a rocket to go to the moon using slide rules, we can find a better way, if we want to- I suspect we don't really want to deal with it- so much easier just to breed more people.

 

Just a thought, but if Japan doesn't want to let in more immigrants, send the old people to other countries with high unemployment to be looked after.

 

More people are retiring and fewer people are paying into the social safety net. 

 

I suspect that Japan is very wealthy, but most of the wealth is in the hands of very few, as in most countries. Let's redistribute the wealth then. Problem solved.

Actually these days many Japanese DO spend their golden years overseas- in places like Thailand. But they only do so if they can have services rendered in their mother tongue for the most part.  And they would still draw their national pensions just as if they stayed home, and still are eligible for national health care benefits just as if they stated home. So exporting the oldsters really isn't a solution.  It would not decrease the cost of their care in any appreciable way. 

 

As for wealth concentration, Japan is already quite egalitarian. If you look at the Gini Index, Japan ranks more towards equal than most other developed countries- on par with most European countries and better than the US/Canada/Oz.   

 

What do you mean by "redistribute the wealth" exactly? Have the government rob people at the point of a gun and give their wealth to others?

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

If you think Japanese women are subservient to their husbands, you haven't met very many Japanese women!  (my wife included). Women run the consumer economy here nearly 100%.  

 

 I think a lot would happily be stay home mothers if their husbands weren't worked to death by their employers.  

I keep reading alot about more benifits for having children is needed. "The government's financial support in Japan is only about half or even one-third of what major Western countries provide"

[thaibeachlovers]

14 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

If you think Japanese women are subservient to their husbands, you haven't met very many Japanese women!  (my wife included). Women run the consumer economy here nearly 100%.  

 

 I think a lot would happily be stay home mothers if their husbands weren't worked to death by their employers.  

They used to be subservient, just as Thai wives were. I said "they have emerged", so I'm not surprised that they are not now.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Actually these days many Japanese DO spend their golden years overseas- in places like Thailand. But they only do so if they can have services rendered in their mother tongue for the most part.  And they would still draw their national pensions just as if they stayed home, and still are eligible for national health care benefits just as if they stated home. So exporting the oldsters really isn't a solution.  It would not decrease the cost of their care in any appreciable way. 

I never said it would be cheaper. The point is that there are less people to look after them now and even less in future, so if the government isn't going to let carers in, they will have to go where there are carers, or do without.

 

As for being picky, LOL. Beggars can't be choosers.

[Hanaguma]

12 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I keep reading alot about more benifits for having children is needed. "The government's financial support in Japan is only about half or even one-third of what major Western countries provide"

That is part of it. A big part is the corporate/business culture.  There is a whole culture built around men as the warrior/businessman, devoting their heart and soul to Big Poppa Corporation.   There are many government programs to encourage both men and women to take parental leave etc. but few men actually take advantage of them.  There is a LOT of social pressure put on men to put work ahead of family. 

 

IMHO a much easier answer would be just  to simply bribe people.  Five hundred bucks a month per child would probably do it.  

[thaibeachlovers]

20 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

The Japanese should do the opposite.  Preferential benefits going to those in Japan that choose to have families. 

Why should people who choose not to have children subsidise those who do. Rats to that. It's bad enough in my country.

 

21 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

Now this would be really controversial but those who are the best, brightest, and most successful should receive the largest incentive to have children.  Do you want to poplulate your country with the progeny of two parents who are both cardiothorasic surgeons, or two parents who are high school drop outs living on welfare. 

Not really controversial, IMO just common sense.

Singapore tried that a long time ago, but I don't know if it was successful. Many career women just don't want to get married and have children, and I don't blame them.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

IMHO a much easier answer would be just  to simply bribe people.  Five hundred bucks a month per child would probably do it.  

and where would that money come from? Every yen given to parents is a yen less to spend on other things.

 

Anyway, women are coming to realise that having children is not the only thing in life. I suspect it wouldn't make much difference.

I heard somewhere that the Chinese birth rate is falling, despite the restriction on having more than one has gone.

[Hanaguma]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and where would that money come from? Every yen given to parents is a yen less to spend on other things.

 

Anyway, women are coming to realise that having children is not the only thing in life. I suspect it wouldn't make much difference.

I heard somewhere that the Chinese birth rate is falling, despite the restriction on having more than one has gone.

The government here could build fewer bridges to nowhere and trainlines to cities that don't need them.  There is a lot of pork and duplication of activity at all levels of government. A lot of paper gets shuffled, printed, and disposed of that could easily be done online by far fewer staff.   And, God forbid, perhaps a slight rise in taxes. 

[Longwood50]

26 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not really controversial, IMO just common sense.

Singapore tried that a long time ago, but I don't know if it was successful. Many career women just don't want to get married and have children, and I don't blame them.

Yes it is far easier to encourage people not to have children than to have them.  However, perhaps things like government sponsored day care, special consideration for better jobs, special consideration for better schools and even free college for those with multiple children could persuade some to do it.  

One thing is for sure, you want to encourage the best and brightest of your citizens to have children.  The way it is working out now, those with the least education and skills are having the most children.  That is a sure way of guaranteeing a less desirable future for everyone.  

I would envision a program that is exactly the opposite of China's one child policy.  Instead of their penalties for having more than one child, having benefits for having two or more children.  

[Longwood50]

15 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The government here could build fewer bridges to nowhere and trainlines to cities that don't need them.  There is a lot of pork and duplication of activity at all levels of government. A lot of paper gets shuffled, printed, and disposed of that could easily be done online by far fewer staff.   And, God forbid, perhaps a slight rise in taxes. 

The money can always be spent better but remember there are only 4 ways that money can be spent:

1. You spend your own money on yourself. - You care very much about what something costs and you care that you get the best value for what you purchase. 

2. You spend your own money on someone else. - You care very much about what something costs, but less concerned over the value since it is the other person who receives that benefit. 

3. You spend someone elses money on yourself.  A company paid trip, means you care nothing about what something costs, but you are very concerned to get the absolute best for yourself. 

4.  You spend someone elses money on someone else. - You do not care how much somehting costs and you don't care about the value of the purchase since it goes to someone else.  THAT IS GOVERNMENT.  

Giving the government more money is the surest way to guarantee that it is mispent.  The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.  Throwing more money at government will only continue the waste, fraud, and mismangement. 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

19 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The government here could build fewer bridges to nowhere and trainlines to cities that don't need them.  There is a lot of pork and duplication of activity at all levels of government. A lot of paper gets shuffled, printed, and disposed of that could easily be done online by far fewer staff.   And, God forbid, perhaps a slight rise in taxes. 

Alas, governments and bureaucrats need to do something/ anything, else the populace that pays them might wonder why there are so many. Just paying people to have babies doesn't qualify as requiring so many.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

The money can always be spent better but remember there are only 4 ways that money can be spent:

1. You spend your own money on yourself. - You care very much about what something costs and you care that you get the best value for what you purchase. 

2. You spend your own money on someone else. - You care very much about what something costs, but less concerned over the value since it is the other person who receives that benefit. 

3. You spend someone elses money on yourself.  A company paid trip, means you care nothing about what something costs, but you are very concerned to get the absolute best for yourself. 

4.  You spend someone elses money on someone else. - You do not care how much somehting costs and you don't care about the value of the purchase since it goes to someone else.  THAT IS GOVERNMENT.  

Giving the government more money is the surest way to guarantee that it is mispent.  The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.  Throwing more money at government will only continue the waste, fraud, and mismangement. 

 

Well said. IMO countries would benefit if there were half the number of politicians and 2/3 less bureaucrats.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

So your solution is to cede your country to others.  A country is defined by three things, borders, language, and culture.  What you are suggesting is for the Japanese who have built their nation into one of the most powerful economies in the world to pass that inheritance on to those who did nothing to build it but enjoy the benefits. 

The solution lies with encouraging rather than discouraging people to have children.  Society has placed huge financial burdens on those who chose to have children.  Basic law of economics, you penalize something you get less of it, you subsidize it and you get more of it. 

The Chinese with a population explosion problem imposed a 1 child law.  They severely punished those who had more than 1 child robbing them and the children of benefits.  The Japanese should do the opposite.  Preferential benefits going to those in Japan that choose to have families.  Now this would be really controversial but those who are the best, brightest, and most successful should receive the largest incentive to have children.  Do you want to poplulate your country with the progeny of two parents who are both cardiothorasic surgeons, or two parents who are high school drop outs living on welfare.

"So your solution is to cede your country to others.  A country is defined by three things, borders, language, and culture."

 

Are you aware that none of those three things are genetic?  Are you also aware that culture and language are constantly being influenced by internal and external forces and are constantly evolving as a result?  Are you aware that a repressive, patriarchal culture is the reason many women in Japan and other places don't like the culture they are living with and won't support by being "traditional" baby makers?

 

Japan can radically change its culture and economy to encourage more baby making (unlikely), decline economically, culturally, and in population into a much less important country (unpleasant) or adopt a more open, intelligent immigration system (the easiest of the three choices).  It seems obvious which is best for Japan and many other countries.

[placeholder]

5 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

The author is wrong.   I have lived here more than twice as long as him, worked in the public school system, and sent my son through it as well.    If anything, mixed kids get the superstar treatment.   I suspect he lived a rather sheltered expat life in Tokyo, as do many international journalists.  

I'll go with non-anonymous sources:

Expert School Advice For Mixed Children Living In Japan

Dariusz Skowronski, an associate professor at Temple University, Japan, with a private counseling practice in Tokyo, spoke with CareFinder about the issues children of mixed heritage face during their school years in Japan, as well as tips for coping.

Studies show that the vast majority of children with mixed Japanese heritage will face some form of discrimination or bullying, according to Dariusz. Whether it’s overt or subtle (even some teachers are guilty, he says), parents should anticipate dealing with it

https://izanau.com/article/view/mixed-race-hafu-in-japan

[Hanaguma]

40 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I'll go with non-anonymous sources:

Expert School Advice For Mixed Children Living In Japan

Dariusz Skowronski, an associate professor at Temple University, Japan, with a private counseling practice in Tokyo, spoke with CareFinder about the issues children of mixed heritage face during their school years in Japan, as well as tips for coping.

Studies show that the vast majority of children with mixed Japanese heritage will face some form of discrimination or bullying, according to Dariusz. Whether it’s overt or subtle (even some teachers are guilty, he says), parents should anticipate dealing with it

https://izanau.com/article/view/mixed-race-hafu-in-japan

Quote

 

Your quote does not appear in the article, which was written by a student for a job hunting website. 

 

ETA: I did find his article eventually. He gives terrible advice, telling parents to send their kids to international schools.  Unaffordable for most people here and also again an expat choice.  If you want your kids to go to university here, the international schools make it almost impossible to do so.  

Edited January 24, 2023 by Hanaguma

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Your quote does not appear in the article, which was written by a student for a job hunting website. 

my mistake. I copied the wrong link. Here's the correct one.

https://www.carefinder.jp/en/news/expert-school-advice-mixed-children-living-japan

[Hanaguma]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

my mistake. I copied the wrong link. Here's the correct one.

https://www.carefinder.jp/en/news/expert-school-advice-mixed-children-living-japan

Thanks!  No problem, I found it. See above.

[placeholder]

10 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Your quote does not appear in the article, which was written by a student for a job hunting website. 

 

ETA: I did find his article eventually. He gives terrible advice, telling parents to send their kids to international schools.  Unaffordable for most people here and also again an expat choice.  If you want your kids to go to university here, the international schools make it almost impossible to do so.  

The quality of his advice isn't the issue. The issue was bias.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, save the frogs said:

should all culture be watered down?

travel would become virtually pointless.

 

It’s not about your need for travel experiences.

[Hanaguma]

19 minutes ago, placeholder said:

The quality of his advice isn't the issue. The issue was bias.

They go together. His advice was based on his observations, which are questionable.   From my observation and experience, the most important factor in child rearing success is ability in the Japanese language.   

[richard_smith237]

12 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Any country that gives women choices will face a falling Population. 

The countries that give women no choices will inherit the world. 

Strong words from Ayatollah BritMan....  

 

 

[Mac Mickmanus]

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Strong words from Ayatollah BritMan....  

 

 

I seem to recall that he previously got in trouble in the UK for not giving females the opportunity to refuse

[Scott]

A post with no supporting link has been reported and removed.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

15 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

What do you mean by "redistribute the wealth" exactly? Have the government rob people at the point of a gun and give their wealth to others?

While off topic, to answer your question, socialism ( with a small s ) does that, at least real socialism does, not the pathetic version in countries like the UK.  I grew up in one such country and it was a lot happier before it went all in for greed.