@@yeetyeet7070 hey. They are the partner and sponsor of this video. I discuss their articles. I tried to make clear what is essentially a summary of their article and what my own opinion was. Where I agreed or disagreed. I say partner because they allowed me to use their otherwise copyrighted articles and graphs. They also checked that I didn't misrepresent what they say (which I think is fair). But, they had no editorial say in my opinion section, which as in the fertility section, may be different from theirs.
@@ajbahlam I'll say, Dr. Joery's independent conents are far better than this video as well. This episode feels like Dr. Joery shilling Economist's views and highlighting only the stats that supports these.
We've got to the point where we've forgotten how drastically things can change. "This could never happen" is what people say right before said thing happens.
This video format is so good for getting economic news fast. If you can at least make this video once every two weeks (once a week is preferrable) that would be awesome!
This would be a dream for me. Teaming up with the Economist really helps me do this faster since I can rely on their network of journalists rather than doing everything myself. But, this is a pilot project. So, if it works well for them, I hope we can do more.
@@MoneyMacrothat literally could have been said by a bot to which I would have given the prompt "find a way to shill the Economist without shilling the Economist." You just ask them to hire you and be done with it.
"Hey, hello, you know that the Economist is this rad little site that allows you to get reliable, convenient economic information that is absolutely not compromised by Intelligence, why not give them a go?"
@@MoneyMacro This is a great video but I wouldn't consider The Economist a very good partner. They have some of the most predatory subscription cancellation policies.
@MoneyMacro 2 weeks would be way to often. Monthly, still too often. 2months/6 times a year, you’re guaranteed to get one of two elections, and a couple interesting data points. 3months/quarterly I think would be best, you’re unlikely to ever get a drought.
Oh great you're on daily uploads now, i think I speak for your whole audience when I say I will continue to expect this and will get very angry if you do not keep to this. Don't disappoint!
The incentives given to parents in western country are offset by house prices, inflexibke employment arrangements and lack of affordable childcare options; they either understaffed, or expensive or both or just not enough of them and not in cohesion with labour market demands
Has given people more consistent time off work been tried? Working 4 days a week for 6 hours, say. It's pointless having more money if you have less free time to use it, having to work and have more kids.
@@coolbanana165 I think it would be beneficial but I don#t see it happening any time soon as our leaders are more interested in meeting the demands of the owner class
@@coolbanana165 France has a 36 hour work week I think and more affordable childcare. And while one can no doubt debate on if those are influencing things, it certainly has been relatively stable at near replacement level fertility rates. So shorter hours might work, yes. Certainly it frees up extra hours to spend with ones children, something that might be valued by parents.
Sure, but I'm not sure that what some couples do, can let one figure out which factors can increase the chance of having more children or not. You'd have to study over the entire population for that I think.
Honest question! How much did the Economist influence this video? I read the Economist regularly and listen to you for your unique perspective and research.
Totally fair question. I discuss their articles. I tried to make clear what is essentially a summary of their article and what my own opinion was. Where I agreed or disagreed. I say partner because they allowed me to use their otherwise copyrighted articles and graphs. They also checked that I didn't misrepresent what they say (which I think is fair). But, they had no editorial say in my opinion section, which as in the fertility section, may be different from theirs.
In Israel: Non-religious women have 1.9 children on average, traditional women have about 3 children, religious women have about 4, and extremely religious women have about 6.5 children on average. The total average for the country is about 3.
@@smashwombel You may be surprised to hear that some countries with Sharia law are experiencing rapid fertility decline on par with Western countries. So I still don't see it unfortunately, feel free to enlighten.
Wrong. Both "Taub institute of Israeli demography", "wahal data center", "INSS demographic survey" and Israel internal ministry show that secular israeli women, in the years 2001 - 2022, brought on average 2.2-2.6 children and traditional woman bring 3.1-3.2 children.
As a Brazilian, i must say that the Brazilian tarrifs against chinese goods wasn't well received by our people, as it was only asked by our reseller sector and not our manufacturing sector, and brazilian manufacturing is highly taxed here and also in a worse quality than a low price Chinese one.
Shhhh. Don't break Dr. Joeri's bias. In each video I see him sideline a few very very important parameters. I wonder, how will west do if such degree of intellectual dishonesty has permeated in them.
@@ethandouro4334 Oh! I didn't kno any professional can be a fan of a non-peer reviewed journal like this. Heck, hv u ever heard of any physicist who's fan of SciAm or even Nature?
2 million dollars for each baby? Press D to doubt. If it was so then just give the money to mothers directly at the birth of the children, imagine the propaganda: "wanna be a millionaire?" 😂
They found out in South Korea, their new capital has half the housing price of Seoul and guess what? The birth rate rose from 0.72 to 1.07 . Interestingly enough, who would've thought that housing affordability would play such a huge factor?
You are totally wrong. It's the condoms and lazy young people. I'm kidding of course. It's always financial reasons. If you are a renter and struggling you want have kids. Unless you're fucking moron. Every normal human being understand that, except economists. They will always found some stupid study from somewhere that says no it's this and that.
So, let me understand your point: South Korea has spent a fortune to build a new capital. Most of the government workers still commute from Seoul, with even longer time away from their families. And after doing this, the birth rate hardly increased at all still being way below replacement rate, despite the housing price being half as much as Seoul. And you are calling this a huge factor? Please tell me you are being sarcastic!
The mayor of the new capital said a big cause is self selection, i.e. families choose to move there, causing the fertility rate to be higher there. So the birthrate there might not be that much higher.
The reason Westerns don't have kids is because having a kid infringes on their ability to have fun. It is tiring seeing people trying to blame everything else for their own choices.
@@Carthodon but this isn't a new concept. The youth isn't so selfish as to not have children for the sake of fun. It's that people see the cost of having a child and they did the math and found out that having one is almost irresponsible. I guess it's empathy.
The elephant in the room with declining birth rates is cultural changes. Among my peers it seems widely accepted that not having kids and living a DINK or even single lifestyle is okay or even encouraged, something I don’t think would have been true in distant generations. Even if economic incentives are ideal, I think it’s going to take another cultural change to get people excited about the benefits and detriments that come with raising kids.
suggestion: mothers should receive money from the government, based on: take 60, subtract the mothers age, multiply by the number of children the mother has, and multiply that number by a certain amount of money, perhaps 50$, and give that to the mother monthly. an example, a mother aged 24 with 2 children would receive 60-24=36 36x2=72 72x50=3600 so she would receive 3600$ per month, or 43,200$ annually. another example, a mother of 40 with 1 child, 60-40=20 20x1=20 20x50=1000 so she would receive 1000$ dollars per month, or 12,000$ annually
Not really. Cultures like those of India (while India is very multi-cultural, this applies to many of the cultures within it), China, Japan, S.K., where collectivism is still stronger than individualism as a core family value are also seeing demographic decline, with it being more recent in India and a lot more prevalent in Japan, China and S.K.
@@loop4569 I think you misunderstand. In none of those cultures does motherhood carry social prestige in the same way as does a job like doctor or engineer or architect. The cultural change that is required is to accord motherhood high prestige. Then women will want to be mothers, and men will want to be with mothers, and governments will make it easy to raise children.
@@SunilMeena-do7xn to encourage women to get pregnant. i presume the giving money to fathers based on the number of children that they have will not cause them to give birth to more children
Just found your channel and I have to thank you for the work that you do. Too many clickbait channels out there these days and it’s really refreshing to have someone who presents all the info in a concise, nonbiased way. On another note, I was wondering if you’d be able to do a video or two on emerging southeast Asian economies and their growth stories for the foreseeable future? Thank you for the videos!
I'm suprised the birth rate section didn't cover the only birth rate success stories. From what I remember Hungary managed to improve fertility rates by providing more affordable housing. Meanwhile South Korea is building a new city where birth rates are 50% higher than the national average (although the population is mostly comprised of civil servants).
I'm not sure Hungary's fertility rate changes really stand out compared to some other countries in the East of the EU. You can see an even bigger increase with Romania I thought. Most likely the real issue none of those got particularly picked is that aside of Israel no one is above replacement levels. In which case France might be just as interesting or more so, because it has managed to keep at least near to replacement levels for a long time now. Something which one could argue is worth a look at just for the sheer stability of it.
@@Quickshot0 France has 15-20% immigrant based population. May be their birth rate is higher than replacement rate and native's birth rate is way below the replacement rate. It can be one of the reasons for sure, I guess.
@@koushikdas1992 Aren't a lot of those migrants from other developed countries? There tends to be a fair amount of flow of such, also from other EU countries. Even outside the developed world a lot of countries are below replacement level. So I'm not sure we should expect this to really change all that much for birthrate. Though one could probe the statistics for it I guess.
The Indian stock market fall after the election was due to Uncertainty till the oath of PM. As Collations in India are allowed to change so if certain members choose to support the other party, the other party could have formed govt too. only after the oath, is the 6 months ban for changing sides to prevent frequent change.
You should read the book Kris i befolkningsfrågan by Gunnar and Alva Myrdahl published 1934. They where worried about the lack of children (1.7 I think it was) in Sweden and the steady decline that had been going on for decades. Would we exterminate ourselves? The ideas to combat the crisis was implemented by Socialdemocratic governments and yes they turned the numbers positive again. They remained positive for 50 years and are now in slow decline again. But then we are no longer following the model :)
Israel in my opinion is often perceived as an outlier due to its unique political and conflict situations. The necessity to maintain a large enough population to support its military capabilities drives its policy towards encouraging reproduction. That is a very hard scheme to replicate in other developed countries.
that's why usa and europe are importing so many muslins , so they can have the same issues that israel has and the women will start having children to build an army
This is great. I really like this because - as an Economist reader - I don't always have time to read their articles. Something like that but with your own spin is something I will be looking forward to!
As someone in South Africa I must say that there have been a lot of very positive signs in the weeks since the election, the currency has strengthened, power cuts have ended and corrpt politicians are being raided and charged.
Writing for the algorithm what most of the people said - great partnership! I would really love to see more videos like these (maybe as shorts? it would help the algorithms), but please, don't neglect your main videos (like Sabine Hossenfelder).
Two of my favourite trusted sources coming together, excellent! The content did not disappoint as well, interesting trends that although I knew something about already it was nice to get a refresher on
Idk if that'll change your conclusion, but FYI, the fertility rates in Israel changes with the intensity of their religious views - orthodox 6.8, religious - 4.2, traditional - 2.9, secular - 2.1. The orthodox and religious groups together takes about a third of the Jewish population. 2 generations of a secular family = 3 generations of orthodox', as they start at a younger age (18-20 vs 28-30). When I ask people from different counties about why they have less kids per family, they always reply its because of the cost of raising them. That is the main concern. That's what gov. should address.
in germany, education and health care is pretty much taken care of by the government. yet birthrates are below the replacement rate. the solution seems more complex than what you propose but it is def a start.
@@dinglshingle You're right. when I think of it, these people I usually asked were not from the western world. Different cultures have different reasons, and different solutions. In Japan I understand its due to patriarchy and the attitude towards women.
I'm very happy that birth rates are falling so radically. There's no need for 8 billion people. It's not like our governments love children and families and they're telling us that most of us are going to lose jobs to AI. Why would I want any child to be an unemployed slave? There's no need for babies.
I thought Israel's population metrics were heavily influenced by the Orthodox community who has well over replacement levels of fertility while the rest of the country is bellow replacement.
The Economist was once aptly described by a fellow countryman of mine as a periodical which likes to give the impression of (false) objectivity by virtue of its failure to provide authorship for its various articles. I think that about sums it up. But this does not entail the conclusion that I never read this British blast from the classical economics past.
Its interesting how they shifted from being left wing party to being a centre right party, maybe because the left wing vacuume was already filled so they decided to switch right. But their DNA is left wing politics hence they believe In all what Democrats in the US believe in.
I think we're forgetting what The Economist is. They're not exactly left of centre (by international, rather than US standards), not surprising they'd call centre-right parties centre.
My phrasing is the problem. My bad. The 2M figure comes from the following. So the 2M is per *extra* baby. www.economist.com/leaders/2024/05/23/why-paying-women-to-have-more-babies-wont-work schemes in Poland and France cost $1m-2m per extra birth (2M in France).
Besides bonus baby subsidies there is also the point of general subsidy and opportunity cost. Taking the Netherlands as example there is a basic subsidy for each child of ~220 euros per quarter until the age of 18 off which it can "survive". so about 9000 euros. Then the opportunity cost of raising a child. The average parent combined hours spent taking care of children is ~3 hours per day at an hourly wage of 25 euro amounts to ~500.000 euros opportunity cost. Add in 8 years elementary education of ~7000 euros per child per year (based on a 3300 pupil size school organization year report) totaling 56000 (subsidized) Add in 5 years of secondary education of ~9000 euros per child per year (estimated based on above) totaling 45000 euros. Beyond childhood add tertiary education of 5 years average costing ~10.000 per person totalling 50.000 euros Excluding healthcare costs, daycare and choice products such as new clothing the cost of a new person entering the labour market in the Netherlands is at least 160.000 euros in subsidies and ~500.000 euro in opportunity costs. Which honestly is a lot cheaper than i expected, but then again i probably missed important costs. Maybe you can help out?
Did anyone else notice how the DA leader's photo was the only one with a warm smiling leader? All the others looked menacing? God bless "impartial" journalism
My phrasing is the problem. My bad. The 2M figure comes from the following. So the 2M is per *extra* baby. www.economist.com/leaders/2024/05/23/why-paying-women-to-have-more-babies-wont-work schemes in Poland and France cost $1m-2m per extra birth (2M in France).
I used to subscribe to the Economist and read it religiously. All I see now is bias propoganda talking point for their Anglo-American overlords. I love your channel for your unbiased and objective views and I hope you are able to resist and stay independent.
I absolutely love your channel and the content you put out. But I would caution against teaming up with mainstream media such as The Economist. Myself, and I assume other people as well, come to your channel to avoid getting our information fed to us with a biased silver spoon, from the mainstream media.
I used to read The Economist religiously. Back in the 80s, I had a subscription for years. Read it every week. I like their statistics. I like some of their articles. But, after seeing firsthand the effects of a lot of their economic ideas, I must confess that I hate the newspaper. It's perfectly fitting that you are working with them, though, dear Mr Kinda Sorta Keynesian With a Smattering of This and That. Ho hum.
Congratulations on your video about the 5 stories changing the future of the world economy. What a liked more was about how Indy, Brazil, and Mexico will benefit from China`s de-industrialization in the near future considering the nearshoring and trade war against the United States!!!
I didn't have a chance to watch this video until now so my comment will likely go unnoticed but here goes: I'm an Ultra orthodox Jew with an MBA from a top university and my dissertation was about economics, matters such as demographic collapse is very much a topic of interest to me. The reason Israel is blossoming is not because of financial incentives, but because of their value system. They glorify the family unit, something most modern societies do not. This is all, it's this simple.
Housing and hours of work per week have to be the biggest reasons. China's 996 work ethos has to be a big part of their problem. The situation is similar in South Korea and Japan. It is not the problem in Western Europe.
Israel's high birth rate is mostly among the Mizrahi Jews and ultra orthodox Jews not the rich Ashkenazi Jews and this is causing a divide in Israel itself
What does "produced in collaboration with The Economist" mean? Does that just mean that The Economist is paying for the ad read at the end (i.e. sponsorship), or does that mean this particular story was written/edited with the Economist staff's input, or both? There's no clear disclosure in the video or the description
apparently it means 'the Economist won't be jumping on him for copyright infringment for using their articles and they double checked that what he said they said was what they actually said", going by a response to another comment.
@@laurencefraser Oh somehow I missed your reply. I saw his comment replies and it's a bit disingenuous of him that he doesn't explicitly say he got paid for the ad read or he gets kickbacks from The Economist sign-ups using his affiliated link and only talks about how "the partner" allowed him to use the copyrighted material etc.
The DA is not moderate or 'liberal'. It is a hard right, Thatcherite neo-liberal party. The DA is South Africa's equivalent of the Tories. I have never met a DA supporter, who has given me reason to believe otherwise.
Hardly, they still need welfarism to get votes. They'll cede to social democracy soon enough. They just want to remain friendly to FDI because that's how you can redistribute wealth eventually.
When the Economist hails sth as "sensible" and "not controversial", it is for sure beneficial for the class of the Economists avid readers and nobody else 😂
Love your videos Joeri Questions Ft or The Economist? Which is better? Also if there's more research coming out can you do an update on the fertility video that you did it it's one of my favorite videos of yours and i know its a controversial issue right now but do you mind looking more closely at Israel specifically and other outliers like Oman and until recently the United States and their demographic data see what they're doing different
Different. I read both every day. Actually the final story in this video is a mini update on the fertility video. I do plan to do more though. Having a look at Israel in this regard is on my wishlish. But, I might visit Southern Europe first.
I have both, one thing that sliiightly edges the Economist out ahead for me is that they have more data-driven stories with data visualisation. I'm a sucker for articles that are basically 'here is an interesting graph, let's explain it'.
The underlying problem with fertility isn't money, therefore throwing money at people won't fix the problem. People simply don't want to have kids, or rather have a lot of things they'd rather do than raise them, and we've all but eliminated accidental pregnancies. The fertility crisis is impossible to fix without going full Sharia law on women. I agree with the Economist that realistically we should focus on mitigating the negative effects of low fertility.
This is not true. Literally when house prices fall fertility rises. Women are having babies later because most would like to be stable when they have one - this is often characterised as have a home and a steady permanent job. The ability to fulfil condition one is limited before the age of 35, and condition 2 is increasingly impossible. Many women would love to have kids or more kids, but literally cannot afford to do so. Remember in America maternity leave is not a guaranteed so women and their partners have to factor in childcare from almost day 1 of baby, which is often e crippling resulting in one parent basically working to cover little more than child costs - which means both have to work just to live even though a baby requires full time care. Thinking people aren’t having kids because they want a new car is ridiculous. They may not want to have 5 kids, but they would often love to have a couple but even that is nigh on impossible.
@@ast88888iran is a very secular society with the non-religious being the majority in population now , that being said the state is a whole different story
@@veronicamaine3813 fertility rate increases when socioeconomic conditions improves but not by a significant margin. Ideally couples want to have kids but in modern era the reasons have changed, kids no longer provide economic utility like they used to by working in the farms or factories hundred years ago at a young age. Nowadays its purely for psychological comfort or gene pool preservation of parents and the resources and time needed for quality upbringing of kids is very high and burdensome in this era. Even when given the best environment in scandinavian countries women will still choose to have 1 or 2 kids which is 1.5 in avg and replacement rate is 2.1, means population will continue to decline.
I have a few suggestions to help the governments of low birth rate countries: 1. Create an effective dating app or match making services so people can actually meet a decent person to partner up with. 2. Provide government funded date nights events / activities. 3. Give bursaries / grants towards the costs of marriage licences fees / wedding costs (which couples have to pay back if they don't have children) 4. Build more affordable housing to buy or rent so couples have somewhere to raise children. 5. Offer free marriage counselling and parenting classes. 6. Make child care affordable. 7. Improve the economy to help lower inflation so parents can afford to feed, clothe, and keep children warm. 8. Create policies to encourage family friendly companies / businesses, so parents can actually spend time with their children instead of working long hours.
No one is thinking about the AI and robots effect on labour. We might not need a large work force in just a few decades. The reason for maintaining the population high might have changed drastically, and we are ignoring that!
Seems to me lower fertility in the west is thanks to a cultural shift rather than an economic one. The single mom trap was quite obviously hurtful to individuals and to fertility rates as well. But also glamourising childlessness is becoming more prevalent. These two alone might not have that serious of an effect, but they do indicate cultural change. These are not economic decisions, these are lifestyle decisions.
You quoting “Economist “ for most of your news bit worries me. Economist have been predicting China’s fall for last 20 years. Pls use more reliable sources of information . P.S. I am Indian (not Chinese).😊🙏🏽
Fr. This makes me not want to watch it. I used to watch the anti China propaganda for over 10 years and honestly I've been blinded this whole dam time. SHould have made sense though, of course the US is going to demonize those it is directly competing with. Such dirty tactics.
Exactly. Like, do we need more anti China propaganda? There are so many people who can't afford cars and China is able to bring it to them just like how Apple brought the touch screen on a phone to most people. Absolutely ridiculous and the US is the bad guy for trying to prop up a war that could cost this entire world. The US needs to chill tf down smh.
The "overcapacity" EV is a threat to developing countries as it sounds like the developing countries other than China have the ability and technology to build EV with similar price level and quality. Overcapacity is just the sugarcoat of protectionism.
I don’t think that culture was mentioned, but I think culture can have a big effect as well. I genuinely wonder about the case for Israel being that far apart from other developed nations. What are they doing differently and what beliefs do the people hold?
Not Indian. And just raising a point for academic discussion and possible exploration. Could it be that the fall in stock prices be a reflection in the fact that Indian enterprises have grown used to the ruling style and policies of Moody, and therefore the change in leadership itself is sufficient to drive the stock prices down?
No. Stock prices fell because BJP lost simple majority in general elections. Market was wary of oppositions coming to power because main opposition party leader promised redistribution of wealth as well as tonnes of freebies. In addition to this, the two main allies BJP needed to form government(JD(U) & TDP) are notorious for being turncoats. When the allies declared their support to BJP and PM took oath, markets raised to previous levels.
In one aspect, managing a society with an inverted demographic pyramid will be tough/awful, with a growing demand for public services on a shrinking tax base. The other aspect is gifting the future with much smaller, less resource intensive population (especially from rich countries) will be much better for the planet. Fewer mooths to feed, smaller ecologically footprint, less energy & material consumption, are all positive outcomes. If we can make it through the next 50 years...
@@MoneyMacroI do read The Economist, but their foreign affairs I find their analysis superficial and sometimes uncritical. Have you heard of BNE Intellinews? They provide great coverage of Eurasian economics.
@@racheddar I have not heard of this. I'll check it out. I think there economics coverage is really good on average. Of course, I don't agree with everything. But, I never agree with anyone all the time. Foreign affairs is difficult for me to assess since I'm no expert.
@@MoneyMacro if you're interested at least my perspective as an american the best English language Foreign Affairs reporting is probably in the Atlantic which also has a lot of history and Foreign Affairs magazine
the question of birth rate is a much more complex concept than an economic one, the concept of birth rate includes at least social, cultural and psychological issues in addition to the economic issue. Solving the issue of the birth rate with the help of economics alone is like trying to repair a nuclear reactor with the help of a screwdriver alone. So the economy is part of the solution, but the economy alone is not enough to solve the issue of fertility.
as an Israeli, the main reason as it seems for the high birthrate is the sense of community and belonging, when you know there's other people around you that will care for your kids as their own you don't need child care, and you go for holidays at your uncle's instead of overseas it's way more affordable...
Every westerner economist point to lack of Land , labor & Agri reforms post 1991 LPG reforms for India not growing like other ASEAN economies.. while in last 10 years there is huge boost to infra development & exponential decrease of large fraud/corruption but without LAL reform India won't grow as fast as needed.. opposition parties want more socialisms & more spending on Freebies to win elections instead of doing hard reforms..
Honestly ill give economist a shot, currently use bbg and wsj but i feel like anything wsj offers so does bbg so maybe that'll give me a different angle.
@@MoneyMacro understandable... I would love to see an insider video on what goes on behind the scenes in making your videos. How is the research being done... how do you develop the script etc. Is there a team behind this etc. You are one of the most factually correct and insightful channel. Love watching your videos 😇
You missed the part about Korea where you can't afford a house on an average wage, even double earners and the average Korea man blames women for their economic plight, rather than the Chaebols It's traditional to never blame your 'betters' and only blame those you claim as lesser. Korean women aren't interested in the men and are leaving the country to find suitable partners
Korean women want a white guy and some a black guy. Korean men can be the best men they can be it dont matter. Its brutal for East Asians. Even in the west you see East Asian women mostly go for white guys. Loads of Asian men are well paid and nice guys but people just dont want them
Super stoked to have worked with The Economist on this. Can wholeheartedly recommend giving them a go: www.economist.com/moneymacro
If they are sponsors, you need to do due diligence and mention this in the video.
CRINGE
if you are financially compromised now, you have to tell us
@@yeetyeet7070 hey. They are the partner and sponsor of this video. I discuss their articles. I tried to make clear what is essentially a summary of their article and what my own opinion was. Where I agreed or disagreed. I say partner because they allowed me to use their otherwise copyrighted articles and graphs. They also checked that I didn't misrepresent what they say (which I think is fair). But, they had no editorial say in my opinion section, which as in the fertility section, may be different from theirs.
@@MoneyMacro ok then why are you repeating what they saying for the last 10 years about India. where is your primary research?
The Economist must be honoured to work with such a big name
literally, lucky for The Economist
Agreed, Joeri's content is far better than The Economist's.
@@ajbahlam I'll say, Dr. Joery's independent conents are far better than this video as well. This episode feels like Dr. Joery shilling Economist's views and highlighting only the stats that supports these.
The economist is really in need of some actual economics
We've got to the point where we've forgotten how drastically things can change. "This could never happen" is what people say right before said thing happens.
That will never happen.
History is driven by tail events.
Elon Musk used to laugh when asked about BYD
nothing ever happens
🤞 house crash here we gooooo (only after I buy tho thx)
We're blessed by back-to-back _Money & Macro_ videos 🙏
This video format is so good for getting economic news fast.
If you can at least make this video once every two weeks (once a week is preferrable) that would be awesome!
This would be a dream for me. Teaming up with the Economist really helps me do this faster since I can rely on their network of journalists rather than doing everything myself. But, this is a pilot project. So, if it works well for them, I hope we can do more.
@@MoneyMacrothat literally could have been said by a bot to which I would have given the prompt "find a way to shill the Economist without shilling the Economist."
You just ask them to hire you and be done with it.
"Hey, hello, you know that the Economist is this rad little site that allows you to get reliable, convenient economic information that is absolutely not compromised by Intelligence, why not give them a go?"
@@MoneyMacro This is a great video but I wouldn't consider The Economist a very good partner. They have some of the most predatory subscription cancellation policies.
@MoneyMacro
2 weeks would be way to often.
Monthly, still too often.
2months/6 times a year, you’re guaranteed to get one of two elections, and a couple interesting data points.
3months/quarterly I think would be best, you’re unlikely to ever get a drought.
Oh great you're on daily uploads now, i think I speak for your whole audience when I say I will continue to expect this and will get very angry if you do not keep to this. Don't disappoint!
Haha one day we'll get there
The incentives given to parents in western country are offset by house prices, inflexibke employment arrangements and lack of affordable childcare options; they either understaffed, or expensive or both or just not enough of them and not in cohesion with labour market demands
Has given people more consistent time off work been tried? Working 4 days a week for 6 hours, say.
It's pointless having more money if you have less free time to use it, having to work and have more kids.
@@coolbanana165 I think it would be beneficial but I don#t see it happening any time soon as our leaders are more interested in meeting the demands of the owner class
@@coolbanana165 France has a 36 hour work week I think and more affordable childcare. And while one can no doubt debate on if those are influencing things, it certainly has been relatively stable at near replacement level fertility rates.
So shorter hours might work, yes. Certainly it frees up extra hours to spend with ones children, something that might be valued by parents.
There are plenty of wealthy couples who can have children but still choose not to or only have one
Sure, but I'm not sure that what some couples do, can let one figure out which factors can increase the chance of having more children or not. You'd have to study over the entire population for that I think.
Honest question! How much did the Economist influence this video? I read the Economist regularly and listen to you for your unique perspective and research.
Totally fair question.
I discuss their articles. I tried to make clear what is essentially a summary of their article and what my own opinion was. Where I agreed or disagreed. I say partner because they allowed me to use their otherwise copyrighted articles and graphs. They also checked that I didn't misrepresent what they say (which I think is fair). But, they had no editorial say in my opinion section, which as in the fertility section, may be different from theirs.
In Israel: Non-religious women have 1.9 children on average, traditional women have about 3 children, religious women have about 4, and extremely religious women have about 6.5 children on average. The total average for the country is about 3.
I mean it's a womb war. The more jew children the less they get outnumbered by arabs who already have a high fertility rate
We know the solution to the problem, we just don't like it
@@smashwombel You may be surprised to hear that some countries with Sharia law are experiencing rapid fertility decline on par with Western countries. So I still don't see it unfortunately, feel free to enlighten.
I think it's correlated with women's education and work participation. No answer there unfortunately
Wrong.
Both "Taub institute of Israeli demography", "wahal data center", "INSS demographic survey" and Israel internal ministry show that secular israeli women, in the years 2001 - 2022, brought on average 2.2-2.6 children and traditional woman bring 3.1-3.2 children.
As a Brazilian, i must say that the Brazilian tarrifs against chinese goods wasn't well received by our people, as it was only asked by our reseller sector and not our manufacturing sector, and brazilian manufacturing is highly taxed here and also in a worse quality than a low price Chinese one.
Shhhh. Don't break Dr. Joeri's bias. In each video I see him sideline a few very very important parameters. I wonder, how will west do if such degree of intellectual dishonesty has permeated in them.
@@aniksamiurrahman6365 he's a The Economist fan, what did you expect
@@ethandouro4334 Oh! I didn't kno any professional can be a fan of a non-peer reviewed journal like this. Heck, hv u ever heard of any physicist who's fan of SciAm or even Nature?
Oh wow, another money and macro video already? Bravo! 👏
2 million dollars for each baby? Press D to doubt.
If it was so then just give the money to mothers directly at the birth of the children, imagine the propaganda: "wanna be a millionaire?" 😂
@@MarketsDriveTheWorld Likely, a large part of that 2 million gets wasted in bureaucracy. It would be far better to give directly to mothers.
They found out in South Korea, their new capital has half the housing price of Seoul and guess what? The birth rate rose from 0.72 to 1.07 . Interestingly enough, who would've thought that housing affordability would play such a huge factor?
You are totally wrong. It's the condoms and lazy young people. I'm kidding of course. It's always financial reasons. If you are a renter and struggling you want have kids. Unless you're fucking moron. Every normal human being understand that, except economists. They will always found some stupid study from somewhere that says no it's this and that.
So, let me understand your point: South Korea has spent a fortune to build a new capital. Most of the government workers still commute from Seoul, with even longer time away from their families. And after doing this, the birth rate hardly increased at all still being way below replacement rate, despite the housing price being half as much as Seoul. And you are calling this a huge factor? Please tell me you are being sarcastic!
The mayor of the new capital said a big cause is self selection, i.e. families choose to move there, causing the fertility rate to be higher there. So the birthrate there might not be that much higher.
The reason Westerns don't have kids is because having a kid infringes on their ability to have fun. It is tiring seeing people trying to blame everything else for their own choices.
@@Carthodon but this isn't a new concept. The youth isn't so selfish as to not have children for the sake of fun. It's that people see the cost of having a child and they did the math and found out that having one is almost irresponsible. I guess it's empathy.
Awesome video, I regularly enjoy The Economist's stories and it's cool to see them partner with one of my favorite YT channels!
Congrats on the partnership with The Economist! Commenting for the algorithm. I was very happy to get two M&M videos in a single week.
The elephant in the room with declining birth rates is cultural changes. Among my peers it seems widely accepted that not having kids and living a DINK or even single lifestyle is okay or even encouraged, something I don’t think would have been true in distant generations. Even if economic incentives are ideal, I think it’s going to take another cultural change to get people excited about the benefits and detriments that come with raising kids.
suggestion:
mothers should receive money from the government, based on:
take 60, subtract the mothers age, multiply by the number of children the mother has, and multiply that number by a certain amount of money, perhaps 50$, and give that to the mother monthly.
an example,
a mother aged 24 with 2 children would receive
60-24=36
36x2=72
72x50=3600
so she would receive 3600$ per month, or 43,200$ annually.
another example,
a mother of 40 with 1 child,
60-40=20
20x1=20
20x50=1000
so she would receive 1000$ dollars per month, or 12,000$ annually
Not really. Cultures like those of India (while India is very multi-cultural, this applies to many of the cultures within it), China, Japan, S.K., where collectivism is still stronger than individualism as a core family value are also seeing demographic decline, with it being more recent in India and a lot more prevalent in Japan, China and S.K.
@@ast88888why only mothers? Why not fathers?
@@loop4569 I think you misunderstand. In none of those cultures does motherhood carry social prestige in the same way as does a job like doctor or engineer or architect. The cultural change that is required is to accord motherhood high prestige. Then women will want to be mothers, and men will want to be with mothers, and governments will make it easy to raise children.
@@SunilMeena-do7xn to encourage women to get pregnant. i presume the giving money to fathers based on the number of children that they have will not cause them to give birth to more children
Just found your channel and I have to thank you for the work that you do. Too many clickbait channels out there these days and it’s really refreshing to have someone who presents all the info in a concise, nonbiased way. On another note, I was wondering if you’d be able to do a video or two on emerging southeast Asian economies and their growth stories for the foreseeable future?
Thank you for the videos!
I'm suprised the birth rate section didn't cover the only birth rate success stories. From what I remember Hungary managed to improve fertility rates by providing more affordable housing. Meanwhile South Korea is building a new city where birth rates are 50% higher than the national average (although the population is mostly comprised of civil servants).
You are wrong about Hungary, childbirths are at record low numbers and 2.7% less children born in 2023 than the year before.
I'm not sure Hungary's fertility rate changes really stand out compared to some other countries in the East of the EU. You can see an even bigger increase with Romania I thought.
Most likely the real issue none of those got particularly picked is that aside of Israel no one is above replacement levels. In which case France might be just as interesting or more so, because it has managed to keep at least near to replacement levels for a long time now. Something which one could argue is worth a look at just for the sheer stability of it.
@@Quickshot0 France has 15-20% immigrant based population. May be their birth rate is higher than replacement rate and native's birth rate is way below the replacement rate. It can be one of the reasons for sure, I guess.
@@koushikdas1992 Aren't a lot of those migrants from other developed countries? There tends to be a fair amount of flow of such, also from other EU countries.
Even outside the developed world a lot of countries are below replacement level. So I'm not sure we should expect this to really change all that much for birthrate. Though one could probe the statistics for it I guess.
Yeah the SK example is not enough to shift the birth rate, the new city has 100k habitants approximately
2 videos in such a short time frame?! You're too kind Dr., bless you 🙂↕️
Thank you, Doctor Joeri, for another instructive video. How nice to see another video so soon!
Nice man. RUclips needs more channels like yours
Can you do story on Argentina please 🙏
I 2nd this
He already has done that.
The Indian stock market fall after the election was due to
Uncertainty till the oath of PM. As Collations in India are allowed to change
so if certain members choose to support the other party, the other party could have formed govt too.
only after the oath, is the 6 months ban for changing sides to prevent frequent change.
His knowledge comes from the economist's article. That is enough for not taking him seriously. Foreigners seldom understand Bhaarateeya politics.
You should read the book Kris i befolkningsfrågan by Gunnar and Alva Myrdahl published 1934. They where worried about the lack of children (1.7 I think it was) in Sweden and the steady decline that had been going on for decades. Would we exterminate ourselves?
The ideas to combat the crisis was implemented by Socialdemocratic governments and yes they turned the numbers positive again. They remained positive for 50 years and are now in slow decline again. But then we are no longer following the model :)
Interesting
This is a really good ad for the economist
Israel in my opinion is often perceived as an outlier due to its unique political and conflict situations. The necessity to maintain a large enough population to support its military capabilities drives its policy towards encouraging reproduction. That is a very hard scheme to replicate in other developed countries.
that's why usa and europe are importing so many muslins , so they can have the same issues that israel has and the women will start having children to build an army
I really like such a format of rounding up major stories in a video. Please continue making these style of vids!
This is great. I really like this because - as an Economist reader - I don't always have time to read their articles.
Something like that but with your own spin is something I will be looking forward to!
Thank you for bringing credible economics education to RUclips
As someone in South Africa I must say that there have been a lot of very positive signs in the weeks since the election, the currency has strengthened, power cuts have ended and corrpt politicians are being raided and charged.
I know this was a sponsorship thing but you could do weekly updates for top stories that affect the global economy. I would watch.
Writing for the algorithm what most of the people said - great partnership! I would really love to see more videos like these (maybe as shorts? it would help the algorithms), but please, don't neglect your main videos (like Sabine Hossenfelder).
Nice partnership, congratulations!
Can you cover South Africa's downfall as a topic of the next video? I want to hear first hand experience of qualified economist.
Thanks, a really good report.
Yes. Love multiple sides of the story. Keep it up 👍
Two of my favourite trusted sources coming together, excellent! The content did not disappoint as well, interesting trends that although I knew something about already it was nice to get a refresher on
Idk if that'll change your conclusion, but FYI, the fertility rates in Israel changes with the intensity of their religious views - orthodox 6.8, religious - 4.2, traditional - 2.9, secular - 2.1.
The orthodox and religious groups together takes about a third of the Jewish population.
2 generations of a secular family = 3 generations of orthodox', as they start at a younger age (18-20 vs 28-30).
When I ask people from different counties about why they have less kids per family, they always reply its because of the cost of raising them. That is the main concern. That's what gov. should address.
in germany, education and health care is pretty much taken care of by the government. yet birthrates are below the replacement rate. the solution seems more complex than what you propose but it is def a start.
@@dinglshingle
You're right. when I think of it, these people I usually asked were not from the western world. Different cultures have different reasons, and different solutions.
In Japan I understand its due to patriarchy and the attitude towards women.
Thanks
I'm very happy that birth rates are falling so radically. There's no need for 8 billion people. It's not like our governments love children and families and they're telling us that most of us are going to lose jobs to AI. Why would I want any child to be an unemployed slave? There's no need for babies.
I thought Israel's population metrics were heavily influenced by the Orthodox community who has well over replacement levels of fertility while the rest of the country is bellow replacement.
The Economist was once aptly described by a fellow countryman of mine as a periodical which likes to give the impression of (false) objectivity by virtue of its failure to provide authorship for its various articles. I think that about sums it up. But this does not entail the conclusion that I never read this British blast from the classical economics past.
So glad you're growing and partnering with large media/news houses now! Don't pay an iota of heed to any of the haters, you're doing great
I'd like you to explore the fact that family size decreases as property prices go up and apartment sizes go down.
I like this type of video, like TLDR.
Nice love this tldr from a source I respect deeply.
Amazing video, solid content and touching upon topics not suited for the whole video theme
The DA is a classical liberal party. In other words what would be considered conservatives in most liberal democracies.
Its interesting how they shifted from being left wing party to being a centre right party, maybe because the left wing vacuume was already filled so they decided to switch right. But their DNA is left wing politics hence they believe In all what Democrats in the US believe in.
Yeah, they're policies are fairly right wing by European standards, but they would probably be a good coalition partner if that would ever be stable
I think we're forgetting what The Economist is. They're not exactly left of centre (by international, rather than US standards), not surprising they'd call centre-right parties centre.
Depends on where. In America and Canada they would be left wing.
In Europe they would be center right.
@@fullmetaltheorist Sure, left-wing of the GOP.
Very interesting and informative 👌
$2 million USD per baby in France doesn't sound correct. I highly doubt that number is real.
My phrasing is the problem. My bad. The 2M figure comes from the following. So the 2M is per *extra* baby.
www.economist.com/leaders/2024/05/23/why-paying-women-to-have-more-babies-wont-work
schemes in Poland and France cost $1m-2m per extra birth (2M in France).
@@MoneyMacro ahhhh, got it. So essentially the programs aren’t having the desired effects
@@myleshungerford7784 yes. The additional baby seems to be exceptionally expensive.
Besides bonus baby subsidies there is also the point of general subsidy and opportunity cost.
Taking the Netherlands as example there is a basic subsidy for each child of ~220 euros per quarter until the age of 18 off which it can "survive". so about 9000 euros.
Then the opportunity cost of raising a child. The average parent combined hours spent taking care of children is ~3 hours per day at an hourly wage of 25 euro amounts to ~500.000 euros opportunity cost.
Add in 8 years elementary education of ~7000 euros per child per year (based on a 3300 pupil size school organization year report) totaling 56000 (subsidized)
Add in 5 years of secondary education of ~9000 euros per child per year (estimated based on above) totaling 45000 euros.
Beyond childhood add tertiary education of 5 years average costing ~10.000 per person totalling 50.000 euros
Excluding healthcare costs, daycare and choice products such as new clothing the cost of a new person entering the labour market in the Netherlands is at least 160.000 euros in subsidies and ~500.000 euro in opportunity costs.
Which honestly is a lot cheaper than i expected, but then again i probably missed important costs. Maybe you can help out?
Did anyone else notice how the DA leader's photo was the only one with a warm smiling leader? All the others looked menacing? God bless "impartial" journalism
Its not Chinese over capacity!!
Its Chinese subsidies to get exports!
good video! glad you're branching out, too
The math regarding French spending per baby doesn't add up. 2mln * 640.000 births = 1.2trillion (or 40% GDP) seems unreasonable
My phrasing is the problem. My bad. The 2M figure comes from the following. So the 2M is per *extra* baby.
www.economist.com/leaders/2024/05/23/why-paying-women-to-have-more-babies-wont-work
schemes in Poland and France cost $1m-2m per extra birth (2M in France).
I used to subscribe to the Economist and read it religiously. All I see now is bias propoganda talking point for their Anglo-American overlords. I love your channel for your unbiased and objective views and I hope you are able to resist and stay independent.
I absolutely love your channel and the content you put out. But I would caution against teaming up with mainstream media such as The Economist. Myself, and I assume other people as well, come to your channel to avoid getting our information fed to us with a biased silver spoon, from the mainstream media.
I used to read The Economist religiously. Back in the 80s, I had a subscription for years. Read it every week.
I like their statistics. I like some of their articles. But, after seeing firsthand the effects of a lot of their economic ideas, I must confess that I hate the newspaper.
It's perfectly fitting that you are working with them, though, dear Mr Kinda Sorta Keynesian With a Smattering of This and That.
Ho hum.
Congratulations on your video about the 5 stories changing the future of the world economy. What a liked more was about how Indy, Brazil, and Mexico will benefit from China`s de-industrialization in the near future considering the nearshoring and trade war against the United States!!!
I didn't have a chance to watch this video until now so my comment will likely go unnoticed but here goes:
I'm an Ultra orthodox Jew with an MBA from a top university and my dissertation was about economics, matters such as demographic collapse is very much a topic of interest to me.
The reason Israel is blossoming is not because of financial incentives, but because of their value system.
They glorify the family unit, something most modern societies do not. This is all, it's this simple.
Hype my favourite magazine with my favourite RUclipsr
Housing and hours of work per week have to be the biggest reasons. China's 996 work ethos has to be a big part of their problem. The situation is similar in South Korea and Japan. It is not the problem in Western Europe.
What problem does China has?? It's just another western created bullshiit!
Great video, thank you! I'd love to see a video on where China get's the money for all the "stuff" it does.
Wow another video in one day!
In line with your earlier video on India's growth, reforms in local government is highly unlikely and the atmosphere hasn't changed much (incentives).
We really need a fully automatic global economy. Can we do that in a century? Maybe two, considering the very uncertain outcome of climate change...
Israel's high birth rate is mostly among the Mizrahi Jews and ultra orthodox Jews not the rich Ashkenazi Jews and this is causing a divide in Israel itself
love the suit
What does "produced in collaboration with The Economist" mean? Does that just mean that The Economist is paying for the ad read at the end (i.e. sponsorship), or does that mean this particular story was written/edited with the Economist staff's input, or both? There's no clear disclosure in the video or the description
apparently it means 'the Economist won't be jumping on him for copyright infringment for using their articles and they double checked that what he said they said was what they actually said", going by a response to another comment.
@@laurencefraser Oh somehow I missed your reply. I saw his comment replies and it's a bit disingenuous of him that he doesn't explicitly say he got paid for the ad read or he gets kickbacks from The Economist sign-ups using his affiliated link and only talks about how "the partner" allowed him to use the copyrighted material etc.
The DA is not moderate or 'liberal'. It is a hard right, Thatcherite neo-liberal party. The DA is South Africa's equivalent of the Tories. I have never met a DA supporter, who has given me reason to believe otherwise.
Hardly, they still need welfarism to get votes. They'll cede to social democracy soon enough. They just want to remain friendly to FDI because that's how you can redistribute wealth eventually.
When the Economist hails sth as "sensible" and "not controversial", it is for sure beneficial for the class of the Economists avid readers and nobody else 😂
Where did you take the poll for the UK? Reform seems to have surpassed the conservatives
Love your videos Joeri
Questions
Ft or The Economist? Which is better?
Also if there's more research coming out can you do an update on the fertility video that you did it it's one of my favorite videos of yours and i know its a controversial issue right now but do you mind looking more closely at Israel specifically and other outliers like Oman and until recently the United States and their demographic data see what they're doing different
Different. I read both every day. Actually the final story in this video is a mini update on the fertility video. I do plan to do more though. Having a look at Israel in this regard is on my wishlish. But, I might visit Southern Europe first.
I have both, one thing that sliiightly edges the Economist out ahead for me is that they have more data-driven stories with data visualisation. I'm a sucker for articles that are basically 'here is an interesting graph, let's explain it'.
The underlying problem with fertility isn't money, therefore throwing money at people won't fix the problem. People simply don't want to have kids, or rather have a lot of things they'd rather do than raise them, and we've all but eliminated accidental pregnancies.
The fertility crisis is impossible to fix without going full Sharia law on women. I agree with the Economist that realistically we should focus on mitigating the negative effects of low fertility.
iran is also experiencing the fertility collapse, so sharia wouldnt help
One of the main reasons they don't want to have kids is unaffordable housing and therefore money though...
This is not true. Literally when house prices fall fertility rises. Women
are having babies later because most would like to be stable when they have one - this is often characterised as have a home and a steady permanent job. The ability to fulfil condition one is limited before the age of 35, and condition 2 is increasingly impossible. Many women would love to have kids or more kids, but literally cannot afford to do so. Remember in America maternity leave is not a guaranteed so women and their partners have to factor in childcare from almost day 1 of baby, which is often e crippling resulting in one parent basically working to cover little more than child costs - which means both have to work just to live even though a baby requires full time care. Thinking people aren’t having kids because they want a new car is ridiculous. They may not want to have 5 kids, but they would often love to have a couple but even that is nigh on impossible.
@@ast88888iran is a very secular society with the non-religious being the majority in population now , that being said the state is a whole different story
@@veronicamaine3813 fertility rate increases when socioeconomic conditions improves but not by a significant margin. Ideally couples want to have kids but in modern era the reasons have changed, kids no longer provide economic utility like they used to by working in the farms or factories hundred years ago at a young age.
Nowadays its purely for psychological comfort or gene pool preservation of parents and the resources and time needed for quality upbringing of kids is very high and burdensome in this era.
Even when given the best environment in scandinavian countries women will still choose to have 1 or 2 kids which is 1.5 in avg and replacement rate is 2.1, means population will continue to decline.
I have a few suggestions to help the governments of low birth rate countries:
1. Create an effective dating app or match making services so people can actually meet a decent person to partner up with.
2. Provide government funded date nights events / activities.
3. Give bursaries / grants towards the costs of marriage licences fees / wedding costs (which couples have to pay back if they don't have children)
4. Build more affordable housing to buy or rent so couples have somewhere to raise children.
5. Offer free marriage counselling and parenting classes.
6. Make child care affordable.
7. Improve the economy to help lower inflation so parents can afford to feed, clothe, and keep children warm.
8. Create policies to encourage family friendly companies / businesses, so parents can actually spend time with their children instead of working long hours.
9. Get the state out of marriage contracts. A lot of guys just aren’t willing to settle down because the inherent disadvantage with divorce.
if you plan to mention 20 times in 10 minutes Economist then why don't you just sell channel to them?
extremely annoying
time to leave this propaganda
No one is thinking about the AI and robots effect on labour.
We might not need a large work force in just a few decades.
The reason for maintaining the population high might have changed drastically, and we are ignoring that!
Seems to me lower fertility in the west is thanks to a cultural shift rather than an economic one.
The single mom trap was quite obviously hurtful to individuals and to fertility rates as well. But also glamourising childlessness is becoming more prevalent.
These two alone might not have that serious of an effect, but they do indicate cultural change. These are not economic decisions, these are lifestyle decisions.
You quoting “Economist “ for most of your news bit worries me. Economist have been predicting China’s fall for last 20 years. Pls use more reliable sources of information .
P.S. I am Indian (not Chinese).😊🙏🏽
Fr. This makes me not want to watch it. I used to watch the anti China propaganda for over 10 years and honestly I've been blinded this whole dam time. SHould have made sense though, of course the US is going to demonize those it is directly competing with. Such dirty tactics.
"Cheap Chinese Goods" Aka affordable high quality consumer EVs
Exactly. Like, do we need more anti China propaganda? There are so many people who can't afford cars and China is able to bring it to them just like how Apple brought the touch screen on a phone to most people. Absolutely ridiculous and the US is the bad guy for trying to prop up a war that could cost this entire world. The US needs to chill tf down smh.
The "overcapacity" EV is a threat to developing countries as it sounds like the developing countries other than China have the ability and technology to build EV with similar price level and quality. Overcapacity is just the sugarcoat of protectionism.
I don’t think that culture was mentioned, but I think culture can have a big effect as well. I genuinely wonder about the case for Israel being that far apart from other developed nations. What are they doing differently and what beliefs do the people hold?
Good to see a vid on the poor and upcoming BRICS nations: Britain Russia India China South Africa.
Not Indian. And just raising a point for academic discussion and possible exploration.
Could it be that the fall in stock prices be a reflection in the fact that Indian enterprises have grown used to the ruling style and policies of Moody, and therefore the change in leadership itself is sufficient to drive the stock prices down?
No. Stock prices fell because BJP lost simple majority in general elections. Market was wary of oppositions coming to power because main opposition party leader promised redistribution of wealth as well as tonnes of freebies. In addition to this, the two main allies BJP needed to form government(JD(U) & TDP) are notorious for being turncoats. When the allies declared their support to BJP and PM took oath, markets raised to previous levels.
Ok, this is a kind of sponsored content I don’t dislike at all
In one aspect, managing a society with an inverted demographic pyramid will be tough/awful, with a growing demand for public services on a shrinking tax base.
The other aspect is gifting the future with much smaller, less resource intensive population (especially from rich countries) will be much better for the planet.
Fewer mooths to feed, smaller ecologically footprint, less energy & material consumption, are all positive outcomes.
If we can make it through the next 50 years...
I love this channel but hate The Economist. Love Financial Times though.
Really!? I have been a happy long time subscriber of both.
@@MoneyMacroI do read The Economist, but their foreign affairs I find their analysis superficial and sometimes uncritical.
Have you heard of BNE Intellinews? They provide great coverage of Eurasian economics.
@@racheddar I have not heard of this. I'll check it out.
I think there economics coverage is really good on average. Of course, I don't agree with everything. But, I never agree with anyone all the time.
Foreign affairs is difficult for me to assess since I'm no expert.
@@MoneyMacro if you're interested at least my perspective as an american the best English language Foreign Affairs reporting is probably in the Atlantic which also has a lot of history and Foreign Affairs magazine
the question of birth rate is a much more complex concept than an economic one, the concept of birth rate includes at least social, cultural and psychological issues in addition to the economic issue. Solving the issue of the birth rate with the help of economics alone is like trying to repair a nuclear reactor with the help of a screwdriver alone. So the economy is part of the solution, but the economy alone is not enough to solve the issue of fertility.
Does he get info from anywhere but the economist
as an Israeli, the main reason as it seems for the high birthrate is the sense of community and belonging, when you know there's other people around you that will care for your kids as their own you don't need child care, and you go for holidays at your uncle's instead of overseas it's way more affordable...
Money and Macro is now on an upload spree 👀
I like this guy
Me too!
An congratulations
Regarding some comments about Mexico, I believe you haven't gotten in deep and just got mainstream general opinions.
Can you link to some non-mainstream opinion sources?
Every westerner economist point to lack of Land , labor & Agri reforms post 1991 LPG reforms for India not growing like other ASEAN economies.. while in last 10 years there is huge boost to infra development & exponential decrease of large fraud/corruption but without LAL reform India won't grow as fast as needed.. opposition parties want more socialisms & more spending on Freebies to win elections instead of doing hard reforms..
1 Climate
2 Extreme Weather
3 Drought
4 Famine
5 Pandemic
Take a shot everytime he said the economist
Honestly ill give economist a shot, currently use bbg and wsj but i feel like anything wsj offers so does bbg so maybe that'll give me a different angle.
Hahaha.... was this filmed before the India can't grow like china video ??
That video was released yeaterday lol ...
Hahahaha
yes ... hehe a slight delay occured when producing this video ;)
@@MoneyMacro understandable...
I would love to see an insider video on what goes on behind the scenes in making your videos. How is the research being done... how do you develop the script etc.
Is there a team behind this etc.
You are one of the most factually correct and insightful channel.
Love watching your videos 😇
You missed the part about Korea where you can't afford a house on an average wage, even double earners and the average Korea man blames women for their economic plight, rather than the Chaebols
It's traditional to never blame your 'betters' and only blame those you claim as lesser. Korean women aren't interested in the men and are leaving the country to find suitable partners
Korean women want a white guy and some a black guy. Korean men can be the best men they can be it dont matter. Its brutal for East Asians. Even in the west you see East Asian women mostly go for white guys. Loads of Asian men are well paid and nice guys but people just dont want them
Can you make video on books you recomend on economics.
Democracy for the win!!
Collaborating with Neolib Establishment Media that most of your viewers came to YT to avoid..... Bold Move Cotton.