29:26 I've been thinking along the same lines regarding East Asia's treatment of the elderly after this crisis. What initially starts as the elderly starving to death because people can't support them becomes ingrained as a morbid, culturally expected practice of suicide upon retirement. Just like the infanticide of yesteryear, this is deeply horrifying.
There was a Japanese movie* discussing different "nightmare scenarios" for Japan, from Fallout-style bunker lifestyles to state-mandated euthanasia for the elderly past a certain age. I think those elderly without any children would be "strongly encouraged" by their governments to end their lives through euthanasia, or very heavy taxes might be imposed on those childless retirees to compensate. East Asia has historically been home to some of the most gruesome practices in human history, so these solutions are definitely on the table.
In Japan's case, Seppuku was a standard practice for the Samurai class wherein you'd commit ritual suicide if you bring shame to your clan. So, as you said, the cultural foundations are already there, albeit they'd have to be massively scaled up.
Yes that came to my mind when the topic of infanticide came up. It is truly disturbing thought. But unfortunately I think it would be realistic... Maybe alongside the social credit system. You did not contribute to society = you dont get any pensions, health care, what so ever
It's also in line with the Confucianism and be packaged like "the old shall not burden the young". It may become a socially reinforced duty to commit suicide once you become a "net loss" to society (retirement, social security, illnesses) with the old who do not "fulfill their duty" being looked at with scorn by the wider society i.e. "my grandpa committed suicide for the country, but why are you selfishly living?" Eventually the government will reflect the will of the people and enact laws that levy high taxes on the old, cut back welfare, etc.
As a Mongolian I agree with your assessment about Mongolia being a "different" animal than China, Japan and Korea. Although Mongolia shares the same time zones as China, and Mongolians look similar to Chinese, especially Northern Chinese, we don't have anything in common. Culturally we have more in common with the Central Asian Turkic countries, except for 2 major differences: 1. Language: Mongolians speak Mongolian which is mutually unintelligible with Mandarin, Cantonese or any of the Turkic languages. While Central Asians speak their native Turkic languages, plus Russian. 2. Religion: the state religion of Mongolia is Buddhism, although most people are not religious. While Central Asians are Muslims, but moderate compared to Arabic countries. So, basically we're the eastern-most Central Asians, similar to how Czechs are western-most Slavs.
@@Omcs234nah most cant tell the different between chinese and mongolian lmao, inner mongolia is in china and outermongolia was stolen by the ussr technically mongolian is supposed to be an ethnicity in china like manchus
Anthropologist Susan Greenhalgh, along with other researchers, has shown that nearly all of China’s fertility decline happened before the One-Child Policy started in 1979. They essentially closed the barn door after the horses had bolted. It did seem to have an outsized impact on sex ratio at birth, though. I was just in Seoul and Busan with my twin baby daughters. Many parts of Seoul are like a super orderly scene from Children of Men. What made it strange is that EVERYBODY is super kid-friendly. Not in an intrusive way; just very kind and curious about babies. Having lived in all the other East Asian countries where fertility has collapsed, this contradiction between positivity toward babies, and the failure to produce more of their own, was really striking in Korea. A real pity.
The more you care the less kids you have. it's a horrible paradox like overprotective parenting being a disaster for child development English folks seem very sympathetic and nice too and are hypocrite devils inside
Normal. Take any high school girl talking how she absolutely can't stand them little brats and how happy she is to know she will never give birth to one, invite her over to see her friend's newborn baby and watch as she oggles all over it for two hours straight.
@@yarpen26 horrible. I don't think societies that embraced such norms are going to last for a long time. Either hostile societies will replace them or maybe sometimes in the future they will go full handmaid's tale to change the outcomes.
@@jostnamane3951full replacement is unlikely, most likely scenario is that conservative demographic forces very slowly take over the countries tough unusually high fertility rate, it already has happened in Israel, look at their government Nationalist forces can too take over and quite quickly, put pro-natalist policies, the effects of those pro-natalist policies are in fact effective, is just that the fertility rates are so low that such a thing is not enough, countries in Eastern Europe did go from numbers around 1.1-1.3 to numbers like 1.4-1.6, which isn't enough, the lack of strictly traditionalist demographic forces will likely lead to a very slow recovery of population growth as housing prices plummet and abandoned houses start to be resettled, the combination of progressive values with traditionalism may work as well, with more out of wedlock births being allowed, however out of wedlock births tend socially problematic in the long run, By looking at a map, you realize that, Tokyo fertility rate is 1 child per women with is far below average, it's population keeps growing because of internal migration, but after some time it will decline even with immigration leading to a eventual recover in population growth, but this can take decades, If not more than a century
Yeah, so there's a correlation between speed of industrialisation and the speed of falling birthrates. The trend is the same around the world, but the speed is very different.
A lot of people forget one of the more important factors in this - The societal and cultural views on marriage, children and the like. This has been the case ever since the rapid secularisation, feminist and sexual movements that have been present in the west since the late 60s.
@@mrvictorian4004 people simply have a lot more choices nowadays (travel, hobbies, luxuries, leisure, entertainment), and as a parent let me tell you, kids are a lot of hard work while your own needs go on the back burner. I totally get why people wouldn't want to make the sacrifices in constraints imposed, money spent and time and energy expended. Plus kids were a large part of your retirement planning as well as reinsurance generally. The social state now does that to a large degree (pensions, Healthcare, social services, retirement homes etc) so that need completely falls off too...
As a Taiwanese, I'd say the reason why we and East Asia has low birth rate us because we practice elitism. We all want our kids to learn foreign language, have musical instrument lessons, sending them to tutoring class for good grades, all these costs a lot of money, and our economy despite being strong, but it has been stuck the same for about 20 years. Japan and Taiwan all have similar economic situations, in Taiwan, our salary isn't increased much compared to 20 years ago, but cost of living is increasing over these 20 years. Japan calling themselves having a "Lost 20 years"(now they're calling it Lost 30 years because it's hitting the 30th year) same problem with income is not increasing much, but people's desire and expectations are higher than any other previous generations. South Korea is similar like Taiwan from what I know talking with my Korean friends, we are literally fighting for who has the lowest birth rate for recent years lol. But they definitely are getting a lot of foreign women and men moving to Korea because of K pop. Taiwan is getting a significant amount of foreigners coming to our country than before too, but not as much compared to Japan and Korea
It's happening everywhere bro, even in Africa and South America they have gone from 6-8 child Per woman to 2-3 In the last 15 years. Soon even immigration will not be a solution for Europe, because there's young people Drtrying Up in Developing world also
The Chinese government has much more diverse policy tools than other countries, such as forcibly ordering large state-owned enterprises, universities, and hospitals in Beijing and Shanghai to relocate to nearby cities to reduce population concentration and prevent excessive competition. And by implementing a strict household registration system, the population of Beijing and Shanghai has started to decrease in the past two years, spreading to other small and medium-sized cities, which may increase some fertility rates. Japan and South Korea are also making efforts to alleviate the population in the capital, but it seems that the effect is not as significant as that of China
China’s government is very good at mobilizing more totally than democratic nations can, however it takes a while to mobilize. This can be seen in the fact that the ccp only just, a decade and a half after it was clear that the one child policy was a mistake, allowed people to have three children. Furthermore, the construction of the party apparatus discourages nuanced or measured approaches. This can be seen in their absurd levels of FAI in infrastructure and the negative side effects seen the property market today.
That same system did policy that destroyed them. If you give government too much power they will f it up because by & large of corruption & incompetence.
While true on paper, you can see how it often isn't how things turn out in the real world. You don't even have to look that far behind. It'd Covid Zero policy, as far as QoL and economic measures are concerned, was a failure. Instead of adapting the policy with the evolution of the diseases, the CCP is stacked with yes-men with no room for self-reflection, self-evaluation, and trajectory changes.
@@spartanparty3894I think their problem is not planning a selfsustainable housing because commerce is totally concentrated on shores building more adds to traffic and congestion spiking prices of housing where jobs and opportunities are what squizzes peoples will to have more kids people from all china are pressuring big cities moving in but they could still build more decentralised self-sufficient towns everywhere around China with good agriculture around they just build buildings and think people will magically decide to living there what ended up opposite as they started building these just to flip them as investment destroying any chances for people to move in and actually build any organic economy there 😂 and without these their reservoir of people will lower life expectations will dry up fast so there will be no supply of good hardworking people to move to their factories anymore while old people support will create really psychopathic choices in terms of policies and behaviour of ppl to mitigate new unnatural problems
Exceptional video. I have heard many people bemoan the oncoming demographic collapse, but not a single one consider how the culture might change after the collapse to adapt.
@Embassy_of_Jupiter Partially the rise of atheism and secularism is responsile for the population decline. While it may be dangerous the masses do need an ideology or religion to base their existence upon. The alternative is mass unhappiness population decline, suicides and unrest and it won't matter how much the economy improves. If you lift up the median income you just simply set a new standard for the rat race.
@@ChristianDoretti Muslim countries are also under demographic decline to a small extent, except maybe Iraq & West Bank. Only African countries have huge birth rates.
Great video. Small correction, it was under emperor Meiji, not the Meiji dynasty. The Yamato family is Japan's ruling dynasty, and had done so since the 6th century.
@@holdenennisthe legend says that they have been ruling Japan since 600 bc but it was likely government propaganda of that time to legitimize the rule of the emperor. Basically if your family is tied to the most important God in shinto you will be less likely to be overthrown, and I guess it worked.
@@holdenennis It's kinda shrouded in myth. There are no evidence of Yamato emperors before the the 6th. It's all oral tradition. It's kinda how the first few dynasties of China are mythical without much, if any evidence of their existence.
As an east asian, I would like to talk about the truth of low birth rate. High living and study pressure, high housing price, low social mobility, disparity are the main reasons. These are so called 吃子文化 which means overdraw the future. Poeple feel despair and hopeless about the society. Thus, they do not want to bring these pain to the next generation. Thus, east asians ususally do not want to birth. Women career is the minor reason. In east asia, women having birth means that they need to give up their careers because women need to take care of babies. Many highly educated women do not want to give up their careers, thus, they prefer not to birth.
These narratives are highly speculative, and frankly they're lined with self pity which undermines their credibility. One might as well say that they've angered the fertility god, and so birth rates have gone down.
People who choose it to have kids because it would disrupt their careers and not wanting their descendants to suffer are unknowingly practicing Margaret Sangers Eugenics at population control. It's selfish materialism plain and simple. Those who value their own material wealth above all would only have children if it's trendy.
Yes, it’s a capitalist system issue: who wants to birth the next generation if they and the next generations suffer for life so that the high class gets richer at their expense?
As a Thai, so a sort of east asian, here are my guesses: 1. Total lack of religion. Most countries in the region have nothing to believe in. Vietnam and China are very ireeligious, and Taoism and Shinto were barely even religions in the first place. Communism is also directly anti-family and tradition. 2. Social discipline. The way some of these countries work is that they focus on a single thing, like a national project, and then when they change that, their societies change totally. You can see this in how South Korea was poorer than India 70 years ago, or how Japan went from Edo to Meiji, skipping like 500 years in the west. Thus since their “national project” is economic growth, happiness and essentials are abandoned. I think this also means they will get a family backlash, and it will be super harsh. 3. Economic. Most of these countries are very urban, and it is nearly impossible to have a child and still be making money in their big cities. I remember watching a Japanese gameshow, where someone mentioned that she was born in Tokyo, and the others were totally shocked, since that city’s birthrate is near nonexistent. 4. Sexual repression: these countries traditionally oppress sex, and you basically never talk about sex or even stuff like, what you like in a girl in most places, like classrooms, offices, parks etc. in the US, you talk about which girl you like after class. In Korea, you talk about what you should read for the test. In the UK, if you sleep in the same bed as somebody, you are expected to have sex with them. In Thailand, entire families aged up to 15 still sleep in the same bed, and nothing sexual is expected to happen. I’m not exaggerating btw, our societeis are really that anti-sex.
1. Communism doesn't have anything to do with the lack of families. There were countries with massive "baby booms" during the supposed communist era. Government policy and social advancement is more to blame. Irreligion doesn't seem, necessarily, to be the main cause either, but rather some adjacent cultural development, because Japan and South Korea have even more abysmal birth rates despite the presence of even very traditional religion. 2. This just seems like a guess, honestly. I don't think social regimentation in these countries is a particularly good reason why birth rates are particularly bad. It doesn't seem to me like people are individually making the choice to have one or no kids just because that's what the country is working towards. There are deeper issues with family culture, work culture and generally a very unhealthy social organization for these countries. 3. The first real good reason, though still not quite. Urbanization didn't kill birth rates when people were dirt poor and starving in slums in the 1800s, so why is it doing so when people are living relatively way better? 4. Oppression of sex was never really a good factor for preventing birth rates. People slept in the same beds in the 1800s and such and birth rates were sky-high, also despite very puritan views on sex. Poor sexual education or an unhealthy, sex-negative culture actually tend to make people have more children on accident because they know so little about what they're doing. I would say that instead there is something about how we are being raised or developing socially where the desire for sex, companionship and children is just steadily on the decline. This is happening both in the comparatively sex-positive West and the East.
There's a correlation between the speed of industrialisation and the speed of falling birthrates. The trend (decreasing fertility) is the same around the world but the speed varies significantly.
Thailand which is very religious with Buddhism as the state religion has a lower fertility rate (1.34) than irreligious Vietnam (1.96). In Europe, irreligious Czechia has a higher fertility rate (1.71) than deeply Catholic Poland (1.38).
@@liamthomas8029 it's Religious on Paper not in practice, Vietnam is not quite irreligious it's just that they cannot declare their religion in Poland for example people are not really Enthusiastic about their Catholicism, it's the Active Church Goes that matter to the fertility since those who just claim to be Christian or whatever mean nothing to the Demographics and are usually on a similar situation to the Irreligious.
@@Pedrinluigi1. I think irreligion defenitely plays a big part, I mean definitely not the biggest but still there since there aretoo many examples. I mean Japan is less developed than Israel, South Korea than Qatar and China than Mexico yet those latter three have far higherbirthrates than their counterparts. 2. Yeah, its honestly just a guess lol. Still I think that point stands generally regardless of its effect on the birthrate. 3. Well because in 1800 most of your children would die, almost everyone was religious , most people lived outside cities, and in the cities you did indeed see lower birthrates. Also agriculture is very pro-natalist. You can see this in the US, in which rural, religious, and especially farmers, or at least those who don’t work in a big company have more children. The fact that also everyone in East Asia works in a company or have industrial jobs would also help explain it. 4. You are right in saying those things have a big effect, however I think the fact that sex is even on the table does make people want to do it more. The dating scene is also horrible, most people remain single at 30, and almost no one would be ok with their children having kids at less than 20. Although in saying that, I do think this is a less significant factor than 1 and 3.
Taiwan and South Korea had a decline in fertility rate as China but are richer, that's why I think the one child policy did affect a even bigger decline of what should have been
@@unka2007 hello, China is large, China's GDP per capita is $12,800, but east China's GDP per capita is more than $25,000, there are more than 7 billion people in the world, there are 2.4 billion people over $12,800, of which China accounts for 1.4 billion.
@@玉佳瓏 @@玉佳瓏 Not all 1.4B in china produce more than $12,000. It's average. So it's more right to say half of that 1.4B produce more than $12,000. And excluding inland China is ridiculous. Africa is a utopia if you exclude certain places like that.
The real reasons for low birth rates in Asia are: - the high cost which rules out raising children for a LOT of people (housing, education) - the affect raising children will have on parents' careers. These two issues are both solvable. However governments like Korea and Japan have done nothing but throw money at the problem. China's government will be much more competent at solving the root of the issue, but countries like Germany have seen successes, even with smaller policy changes. In conclusion, the cause of low birth rates is really obvious. The solution is also less complicated than many think, however it requires strong societal and structural changes within areas such as housing and work culture.
The housing solution is multi-generational homes and not giving everyone an individual room. Also Japan has very cheap rural housing but everyone moves to the city to try for jobs that largely aren't available and haven't been since the crash.
Westerners keep lying about china, exaggerating this problem as if they cant change it lmao, the chinese government is extremely long term planning, also confucianism was mostly destroyed in the cultural revolution, Elders were beaten to death by children encouraged by mao. Only idiots think china is mostly confucian nowdays
Hell china doesnt even have the repspect elders shit, or the drinking with boss bullshit, they are attributing japanese problems to china, china literally abandoned even its bowing and traditions under the ccp
In my country (Spain) we have a birth rate of children per woman that is the same or lower. It would be interesting if you made a video about the birth rate in southern Europe (Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal).
Like every other problem in Europe, it is vastly blown out of proportion and should population collapse happen it will be much more catastrophic in East Asia.
@@aircraft2 Spain came to have a fertility rate per woman of 1.14 in the 90s and from then on it only increased due to massive immigration, in fact the population of Spain and Portugal has only increased due to massive immigration while Greece and Italy have NOT They have received massive immigration because their people have not wanted to, they have seen their population decrease
@@aircraft2 The demographic catastrophe of southern Europe will not be as bad as that of East Asia, but it will be close to that level. I repeat, we have a birth rate per woman very similar to that of East Asia.
The birth rate in East Asia is extremely low, but they are far from being the only such place in the world. Southern European countries have birth rates compared to Japan or China (S. Korea is another story). Latin America is a little behind, but I do think we'll reach similar levels if things continue the same. It is clear to me that big long term civilizational trends matters a lot, but I do think the main driver of this is either material (over-urbanization, overwork, high cost of raising children) or/and "small culture" (meaning, recent changes like the fact that children have vanished from people's view and incentives drive people more to work).
Your English doesn't have to be perfect and there's no need to continuously write those apology comments in the video. Native speakers are very used to hearing people speak our language with accents, it's no biggie.
Agree, as an working American we hear so many accents it seems normal. If I could not understand someone I would definitely politely ask them to repeat themselves - but not call a person out, that is very rude. If you are trying it is generally perceived as industrious and worthy of recognition. We all came here from somewhere else, or our parents or grandparents did - accented English is nothing to be self-conscious of.
Critically underrated channel brother - always look forward to your content You definitely should cover the African continent sometime brother that would be interesting
Thier issue is the opposite of east asia. Africa has alwyas been an underpopulated region and is economically behind as well as societally so it makes sense their birth rates would be higher to combat their higher death rate. The Increace of modern medicine is what’s making Africas growth so high compared to what it would be in the past. Asia has always been heavily over populated so it makes sense
I have been facinated with population decline for a long time, and I am glad that it is currently getting more headwinds as compared to the past. As a Malaysian Chinese male nearing 25 years old, almost half of my Chinese friends are single, and many who are dating have nearly zero desire to have children. From my perspective, it seems that the main reason for this is that there is low desire to date due not having much interest, and they rather find happiness in material things such as eating good food with friends or buying material goods. For those who dont want children, they say that children is just a big burden. Many often cite high cost of living as the main cause of low fertility, but I always thought that culture plays a bigger factor, because east asians have significantly lower birth rates than that of white cultures. In addition to the long standing cultural tradition of family size self regulation, i think there are also these further unique factors that contribute to a declining desire for children. Firstly, as another commenter has point out, is the lack of sex education. Many especially girls, feel ashamed when they discuss issues that have any sexual nature in it. Even many teachers who teach super basic knowledge about human sexual reproduction often feels awkward, and they never ever talk about it as a form of pleasure, but just the biological parts. This is quite prominent as I noticed many of my female friends feeling quite clueless when it comes to discussion regarding this issues, and some even.feeling disgusted. The other factor is that growing up, especially in urban families, we are taught to focus only on studies, and to shun dating as it is a distraction. When we taught our kids to shun dating for the first 18 years or even up to university, how can we expect them to go out and find partners once they graduated? Many might have even maintain the mindset that a partner is just a distraction to one's career goals, therefore thinking they are mutually exclusive. Meanwhile, even for those who wants to find a partner, they might not know how to do so, and the cost of finding someone who is not suited for you increases significantly. Another factor which compounds on the fact that we are taught to shun dating since a young age, is that we become very materlistic. East asian cultures, especially the Chinese, place a lot of importance on material wealth. The society basically shuns people who are lower educated, working lower paying jobs, etc. Chinese society also enshrines people who owns many 'assets', which is we often love as real estate so much, as it is culturally symbolic of ones wealth. This is another particular reason why although down payment requirements in China are so high at 30%, many families still insist to pool borrowed money from relatives to buy a home, sometimes for their son who is looking to get a wife. There are still a few factors which negatively impact birth rates in our culture such as bride price, high property prices etc, but I hope to provide more cultural reasons for such a decline, as I believe culture has an equal or even more part to play as compared to economic reasons in declining birth rates in east asian cultures. Thank you for reading!😊
The biggest reason I think of declining birth rate is that in industrialised nations people start expecting perfection from everything. If you want a partner, he has to be perfect. If they are to be parents, they have to be perfect parents. Kids should have good life only no deprivations. Kids have to be geniuses, cannot be stupid. This makes having kids a tiresome business. You need tutors, expensive education, expensive clothes, expensive vacations, expensive house. Otherwise you are a bad parent. Most people can't have good carrier and do all these jobs. So many remain childless and many are unmarried.
@@werren894That's likely because you've visited established city centers in Malaysia. Chinese diaspora are concentrated in city centers and industrial zones, hence the apparent disparity. Source: Am Malaysian.
You’re spot on. I was raised in China and moved to Canada during my teens. There were always boys had crush on me, but somehow I felt ashamed by that, and I focused purely on school. And on the eve of going to university my mother told me I needed to find a potential husband in university 😂, and I had no clue how dating works, what boys were thinking. I was so oblivious. Now I feel like when I was younger, I was basically my mom’s machine, being told and programmed what to do.
I absolutely don't understand the view that "China's population is declining, so they will not ever catch up with USA". China has about 4 times greater population than USA. Even if their working population ratio is lower, and their productivity per worker grow to just half that of USA, they can catch up and surpass USA's economy. The graph at 16:26 is especially misleading, as it has wildly different scales for US and China working age population. Also, if you think infanticide and senicide was not practices in Christian countries, you are very much mistaken. Perhaps it was a taboo topic, but poor communities have done it everywhere, regardless of religion. And lastly - greater population leads to more competition for housing and jobs. It might be better for politicians and the rich, but if housing and life in general is unaffordable, it is not in individual's interest to have children. If governments were really interested in reversing the decline in fertility, they would make sure housing and childcare is affordable. Everything else is just milking the population.
I can't speak to productivity per worker but I believe the rise in living standards (growth of the middle class) in China has largely been due to the export of goods to foreign markets. This could change. I think we are going to see both de-globalization and an increasing preference to source products from other countries instead of China. If that's the case, then it's a question of whether or not China's internal market demand will be sufficient to boost its GDP.
This is extremely interesting. So, Confucian societies believe in collectivity and social harmony, so some cruel acts are acceptable if their purpose is the social good and well being. Sounds kinda machiavellian but also a bit reasonable. But nowadays the effects of urbanization mixed with the obsession with hard work and studying to death are making it impossible to reach replacement birth rate. Such a tragic outcome of circumstances. East Asians seem to be very intelligent and academically oriented but they also fail at balancing that with family life. Just the most blatant example of our failure as a civilization.
Well said, friend. Everything has a cost and their Confucian cultural roots may have given them advantages in many ways but also cost them deeply in many others.
@@wade2bosh according to this dude forced abortions and infanticide. By the way, before the contact with the West these societies were very fond of death penalty, not in subtle ways. The Chinese tortures are worldwide infamous, like the thousand wounds torture or the five pains.
Well does confucianism not encourage people to have children though? I find that almost inconceivable since it evolved in an agrarian society where having lots of kids is a lifeline, I feel like its a western habit to blame every flaw of a non western country on its cultural roots and assign everything good in the same country as being caused by adopting western culture
@@adityarajan592 I didn't say that. Probably it isn't so clear but my claim involves that childlessness is a consequence of urbanization and obsession with working, which is in turn a consequence of the contact with the West. So I didn't imply that Confucianism is against having children, what happened is a tragic outcome of a weird mixture of cultural issues.
I think about how manland China has a huge ban on feminism and porn, but doesn't get a high birth rate. Singapore and South Korea have porn bans, but those aren't effective. It shows me the cost of urbanization more than anything.
@@skylinefever yeah many variables, one no doubt being that China had a one child policy which probably became quite a hard thing to culturally shake off too
@@adhdave Indeed, there are many things happening at once, so just changing one thing won't create a baby boom. Also, I dread the idea of creating a baby boom only among people who are shitty parents to make line go up.
Is true that East Asians have low birthrates, but have all of you ever realized that if European countries, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand were 100% white and homogeneous, all of them would had started to lose population since 2008-2013? For example, the white dutch population peaked with 13 million 10 years ago and has been decreasing since then, the same for the white British and white American. The white French were around 54 million in the early 2000's anf nowadays is around 47-49 million. If it wasnt for immigration everyone would be talking about these countries before talking about Japan, China and Korea's situation
That might be true to a certain extent, but the native Dutch birth rates are still significantly higher than the East Asian. No European ethnic group has fertility under 1 children per woman.
@@JC-ld2uo That's exactly why I said "some" European countries. I'd say France as a whole is doing quite well relative to other European countries honestly, perhaps due to the colonial-era influences.
Comments on the Jolly Heretic Dutton channel convinced me to listen to the tedpill manifesto, because it was argued that industrialization causes Idiocracy.
@@TamagoSando really? That's Interesting. But Why do you think Okinawa has a higher birth rate compared to the rest of Japan since it is comparatively poorer than other parts of the country?
The peoples of East Asia are very disciplined peoples even more than the peoples of Western Europe, and because in modern east asia work and production have become the most important thing that a person achieves in his life whether a man or a woman, so it is natural that having children or relationship is completely neglected by them
I think China's situation isn't nearly as bad as people think, economically. The fast pace of industrialization and productivity growth means that the cost of supporting their elders (who lived in much poorer country) is relatively low, compared to the wage of current workers. Of course long term it wouldn't suffice but this would increase the time for the problem to reach them, like immigration in the west. China, particularly, has a huge population of peasants, which won't have a huge negative economic effect as they age and retire.
The most consistent trend seen everywhere is that fertility varies inversely with the participation rate of women in the workforce. When women buy into the idea of having a career, or when governments encourage women to work in lieu of having children, they delay having children, and often find that they have waited too long, and their participation in the labor force increases the supply of labor and thereby depresses wages, reducing the benefit of the second income. When women choose a home life raising children over careers, it frees them to raise the children, and also reduces the supply of labor, causing wages to rise and making it more likely that the husband can support the family.
Please do a liittle research. European birthrattes are on the best trajectory e.g.: Very gradual decline and only 0.3 (USA, France, UK) to 0.95 (Germany, Italy, Poland,Spain) below replacement. Some 3rd and developing world,E.g.: India, Brazil, Argeentin) have a catastrophically steep decline from 6-7(Only 35 years ago) for woman, to under 2.0. present day. *1st world Asia = below 1.0
@@Rowlph8888 Correct! In India, Women Participation in economy has crashed from 35% in 2000 to 15% today. Yet our fertility rate kept declining. Infact, it crashed from about 4 children per woman to 2.
A few ideas to improve birth rate is 1. Study countries like Israel that has high birth rates despite being a wealthy country. Doesn't mean you copy them exactly but at least you'll get some ideas. 2. Focus on raising birth rates in the countryside and smaller cities where raising children is much cheaper and less pressure to get your kids into the best schools.
agreed, though the videos are not nearly a quarter of how jingoist and conservative whatifalthist is. i will be expecting an antithesis to this channel sometime soon, in the meantime, grab the videos with a grain of salt
I’ve also considered the fact that if the demographic situation got bad enough in the future, that forced suicide would be put in place. I thought I was crazy for thinking it but now I know others have realized it is a possibility as well.
Good video overall but I disagree with the connection you make between low fertility rates and conservative approach to families in east Asian culture. You mentioned women's aspirations outside family life. In my opinion you can make that argument maybe for Japan or Korea but not for China. I lived in China for a while and none of the women had great career aspirations. That's mostly true for the guys too. High youth unemployment and a crackdown on private enterprises don't make for many interesting and fulfilling jobs. There are several factors I observed that explain the low birth rates. The main thing resulting from traditional culture is the concept of "face". It's better to have no kid at all than to have a failure. Therefore, you need to invest a lot of time and resources for your child to succeed that puts a big strain on families, especially if both parents work and they also have to take care of four elderly grandparents. Another factor is consumerism. Despite being an increasingly communist country, China is far more consumerist than the West. This means that people are not willing to sacrifice their lifestyle for children because it would mean that they would also lose status if they can no longer afford expensive status symbols. The decline is further amplified by Asian cultures being even more online than Western cultures. I don't believe this to be a cause but it amplifies and speeds up any big cultural shift which in my opinion partly explains why the fertility collapse was so rapid in east Asia. Lastly there are female male relations that have become increasingly hostile and problematic. One position I've heard is that women now both have to work while still having to fulfill the traditional expectations to care for children and therefore aren't willing to have them. I believe this is your position as well but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. However, I have personally observed something else. Let me give two examples: firstly I have a friend whose girlfriend has a very high paying job (easily top 1% in my country) while he is still a student. Yet, he's still expected to pay for absolutely everything (they are both east Asian immigrants). Secondly, I have seen many very wealthy Asian immigrant families where the husband works and the wife stays at home and they still wait a long time to have kids and have very few (probably due to the factors I mentioned above). I don't believe this position is no factor at all however, men face the exact same problem of still having to fulfill traditional expectations while also being expected to do things that aren't traditional. There are some more things that need clarification in my comment but I think this is getting too long so maybe I'll write more if someone actually reads this and wants to have a discussion.
Very good, yes I have come to similar conclusions. It’s not so much the shift from traditional to modern families that is the issue, but about being squeezed in between the two and trying to figure out how to get ahead. Children are expensive now. Standard of living is higher. Not a great recipe for having large families.
Very well said. The idea that "You should not give birth unless you are wealthy" is definitely deeply ingrained in East Asia nowadays, because being poor will cause you to be shamed by others. Regarding gender relations, men are definitely expected to be the breadwinner, so it is a great point of shame for some men to "live off" of their wife/girlfriend's income (吃软饭). Coupled with high youth unemployment and overly high female expectations of their future partners (due to American media, culture, and the Internet), it is a certainly a recipe for a demographic disaster.
Low birth rate is not East Asia's specific problem. Europe is also low. Because people live longer, keeping welfare and medical care need more money. so governments raise more tax and public dues. It makes young generation poorer. Poor young people cant afford to have their family. Very simple .
I think you're missing the woods for the trees here. You can have a full time job and still be poor in Japan and China. People are priced out of raising a family. Same in China, Korea etc.
They are horridly overcrowded 1 acre per person like .1 acre per person of ariable land. Cutting the population in half is good for them...they get 2 acres per person...the more they lose the richer each individual potentially can be.
Good video, I have to say that I absolutely loved how the tone was completely professional, and then out of nowhere "a shitstorm of contradicting policies" hahaha. Love it. For some reason it makes me so happy hearing foreigners use that word :)
Urbanists: "Rapid urbanization is only good! MOVE TO THE CITIES NOW, PLEB." People with brains: "I take it you've never looked at the correlation between birth rates and rapid urbanization."
Urbanization is cancer, urbanized populations are far more depressed anxious lonely and sociopathic than rural ones - from someone who lived in urban areas
That's just only 1 of the many disasters rapid urbanisation causes It puts a huge strain on soceity it creates economic inballance between regions, it creates ghost towns and dead or dying regions such as the rust belt in the USA or the empty regions of spain, it correlates with a declining median wage, and causes enormous amounts of pollution. ten small cities of 100k people damage the earth waaay less than a singular metropolis of a million. and no transportation needs do not decrease with a centralised population it only ever increases, a huge city needs a constant streem of resources that can no longer be sated by the depopulated countriside making the nation reliant on foreign imports polluting even more, and further devaluing the countriside's ecomic role. Wanton urbanisation is the single biggest cause of suffering in our time. and we will se an exodus within the century. Because the city of Rome already went trough this process in the exact same manner only with less technology. They reached a population of over a million, but that population wasn't a healthy happy pool of manpower it was in fact a huge burden. The entire empire existed TO feed the plebs who were reliant on imported food given freely by the government and the upper class wich trough slavery (just as automation did to us) outcompeted the lower classes from their usual production jobs. The blowback effect was an unstoppoble decline for hundreds of years, culminating in the medieval ages when the empire itself fell apart due to the strains, the entire population was unhappy starving or barely scraping by fed up and straight up unwilling to fight for or upkeep the Roman soceity at that point. A city of a million shrank to a ruin inhabited by 10 thousand ignorant catholic clergymen.
That is not what urbanists say. What urbanists say can be summarized as this: 1. Remove the single family zoning in the suburbs, so that medium apartment buildings (3-4 storey) can be built IF there is demand for it. And there is. 2. To build more housing units to bring down rent and accomodate more people. Which would, ironically, allow many people to be able to afford children. 3. In most parts of the world, including even the US, it wouldn't be possible for EVERYONE to live in the suburbs. So encouraging suburban development (as opposed to non-interference) would just exacerbate property prices and cause these people to live in even worse conditions, thus defeating the purpose. 4. Point out that suburbs aren't able to pay for their infrastructure, like either rural or urban areas can. Rural areas receive less services (which makes it sustainable), while urban areas pay enough taxes. Suburb tries to have the best of all worlds. 5. Building suburbs often come at the expense of cutting forests, converting farmlands, etc. Anyway, this is only a brief summary. I just don't see why this arouses so much pushback (especially from Americans) since it never tells you to turn villages into Kowloons.
@@itsmealex588 People have raised children in much worse conditions, such as cramped slums shared with other families. Regardless, that's not my point. My point was that there are people who want to raise children even while living in apartments (can't believe you didn't notice that), but can't given that they don't own an apartment, or that the rent takes away half of their taxable income. More housing units and cheaper rents would benefit them and allow them to have children. As would laws that make it easier for women to receive childcare benefits while working, or a medical system that doesn't economically punish you for a pregnancy, etc. Also, it's a ridiculous thought that children can't be raised in apartments. Do Israelis live in suburbs? Is housing density in Denmark and Sweden even comparable to that of the US, despite the 3 countries having similar birth rates? It's just that Americans have historically been land hungry. That was not a problem once but cracks are showing up now.
The elephant in the room is that retirement was never meant to be a universal experience. When the US retirement age was set at 65 years in 1935, the life expectancy for men was 60, and women mostly didn't work. Now we live to 80 and still retire at 65 due to the social expectation, and the government is too embarassed to ask us to do something useful with our extended lifespan. In a country with an 80 year old president, it's not too much to ask normal people to work in their 70's. Now the olds are paying for themselves, taxes on young couples can go down and they can afford to have kids.
Some joked that the reason the USA has an obesity epidemic is to reduce the number of pensioners. If the obesity epidemic was fixed, social security would have to pay 10 years more pension to everyone.
Worth noting that the extreme pressures on young people, making it ever harder to succeed in a hyper-competitive country, with a rather minimal social safety net in South Korea, means that those people who do buck the trend and reproduce there (especially those having more than one child) have to be (1) naturally pro-natal, with a strong desire to have children, (2) have a high factor of personality (to manage complex social relationships and hierarchical culture, and resist shame), (3) be high positive affect (so they don't succumb to stress, depression, and suicide), (4) be physically healthy (to endure long working hours, cramped living conditions, and severe air pollution) and (4) be highly intelligent (to succeed in meritocratic education system with a strong focus on STEM for success and to earn enough money to afford exorbitant rents). Unlike in the West, in South Korea, fertility correlates positively with Socioeconomic Status. I think South Korean society is extremely eugenic. Future generations will be healthy, psychologically strong and stable, and intelligent. Meanwhile the familial cultures and behaviours getting passed on will be those associated with religiosity, or at least a strong focus on family and children. Strong genes, strong memes. For this reason, South Korea will overcome the crisis of an ageing population - it will succeed in putting in place those measures (such as increased automation of health and social care) necessary to survive. Meanwhile, its immigration policy is also eugenic - you need to pass a Korean language exam to get residency, and Korean is objectively extremely difficult, so it functions as an effective IQ test.
Also, the political and social pressure may be sufficient to force rapprochement with the North and some sort of economic unification (South Korean companies relocating North of the border to take advantage of younger and cheaper work force (as already happened in a special economic zone in the 2000s), North Korean migrants moving south to take positions in construction and potentially social care).
I would like to add most East Asian countries nowadays mostly see childbirth as an activity a couple should undertake only when they have enough money, otherwise being a poor child will cause you to be shamed by others and severely hinder your future prospects as social mobility is basically non-existent here.
@@TamagoSando Exactly - this further selects for people with the intelligence and personality required to earn sufficient money to support a family (and also for those able to keep a marriage going, because having children outside marriage is frowned upon).
@@TamagoSando However I would rather disagree about social mobility (at least in South Korea). If you're from a poor family, but very intelligent and hardworking, you will most likely get a good grade in your final high school exam (which is taken by everyone) - then you will get into a good university, which is your ticket to a high-paid career. Private tutoring can only take people so far - the exams mostly test maths skills and rote memorisation anyway.
@@edvenify Those are rare exceptions, most children from poor families simply lack the opportunities and resources to even follow that path in the first place. For those rare cases sure they can climb upwards in society, but generally speaking social mobility is very low.
In the past Married Chinese women were pretty much slaves for their husbands’ family. They had to live with husband’s parents, grandparents, even unmarried siblings, sometimes married siblings. The women had to have babies, do house work and take care of the elderly, and withstand abuses. Modern women definitely don’t want that kind of lifestyle anymore.
@@blugaledoh2669 The actual obligation here is for sons (particularly the eldest) to take care of their parents. This is true regardless of whether or not he marries. Men that don't take care of their families are considered deadbeats. Women aren't obligated to take care of their parents. It's not unusual that a Chinese family would send a daughter off to be educated while the son must stay behind to care for the family and work the fields. Now when a woman does marry a man, she shares some of her husbands burdens. To completely omit the greater context here and to characterize taking care of ones family as slavery absolutely is a rhetorical trick.
@@didles123 No, I am actually aware of this. Daughters aren’t obligated to take care of their parents in old age, because they were expected to marry and take care of their husband family. Since daughters were burdensome and would not take care of their parents in old age, it is not uncommon for daughters to be abandoned or aborted in preference for sons. As had happened during the One Child policy.
Great content. Japan will likely survive for sure, unlike their neighbours. East Asian countries have a great culture and society. Immigration is not a solution if the aim is just to expand the population, don't just put random people from other countries but must put high-quality people who can help build the society not just the economy.
How will Japan survive? They're among the most xenophobic of all the East Asian countries. At least when a foreigner marries a Chinese woman, the Chinese grandparents will simply claim the grandchildren as Chinese and ignore the non-Chinese part, whereas Japanese look to prevent that situation from happening altogether. Or ostracize the 'hafu'.
Isn't that what Japan and S. Korea currently doing? The thing is that it could only work very well in English speaking countries like Singapore, Canada where they got internationalized language privilege to get influx of high level proffesional around the worlds, also the population in those countries were not even original settlers so they do not hold the importance of homogeneity for society unlike where they came from.
@@zoey5104 Westerners always say immigration is the solution to the East Asian demographic crisis, but they honestly have no idea about the cultural dynamics on the ground here in East Asia. Even second generation immigrants have difficulties being seen as a native by their own countrymen in East Asia. It absolutely infuriates me to see Westerners say East Asian countries should take in immigration because it works in the Anglosphere countries that they come from. It is frankly very insensitive and ignorant to speak from such high grounds.
The solution served up to Westerners by our own magazines or video broadcasts are always moronic. It is a mixture of clueless incompetence and malice at the high level, and religious derangement to "heal" the world by reducing Europe at the middle and lower levels.
I lived in S. Korea periodically for six years between 1972 and 1990, and thereafter in Japan for four years. I became quite familiar with the cultures, more so than most of my fellow [US] Americans. At the beginning of the video I was concerned at the over emphasis on Buddhism and the omission of Confucianism. The last part of the video mostly made up for the omission, but still underplayed the effects of Confucianism in Korea. Japan is less Confucian, but Shintoism fills the gap. It is true, as stated, that these East Asian cultures have always put the family above considerations of personal wants. This even trumps race preferences, which I have personal experience with. Both Koreans and Japanese believe in racial purity; the reactions of men and families to local girls being seen with, much less wanting to marry, American soldiers, is extremely negative. As a marriageable age white male, I frequently had a woman board a bus, train or plane and panic when finding me in the next seat. They would try to get another seat, then if they couldn't would try to leave as much space as possible between themselves and me. When I introduced myself in polite Korean or Japanese, they immediately relaxed, and usually took the opportunity to get a language lesson from 영어 교수님 the professor. The two elements of Confucianism that were slighted are that a male heir is absolutely required for the continuation of the family, and the reverence for education, and obtaining a university education, transfers to the persons of the educators. Not just that, the prestige of the universities graduated from and teaching at also transfers to the person. So, having graduate degrees from two well-known [if second tier] American universities, and teaching at one of Korea's top 3 or 4 universities, gave me almost rockstar status. Given the bloodline prejudice, I was shocked to have a marriage broker show up at my university to offer me young Korean women as marriage prospects. Of course in addition to educational prestige, there was the Green Card that could get the entire family into the US. The Japanese culture is different. Both countries have been significantly "westernized or Americanized," but to different degrees. It is more likely for a Japanese woman to seek out a foreign husband than a Korean woman of "good family" to do so, but the Japanese woman is usually, if not always, doing so for personal rather than family reasons, and is more likely to look favorably on a Canadian or European match. In addition, the Japanese modified the necessity for a male heir by blood. A Japanese family with only daughters would make a match with another family's second or third son, who would marry the eldest daughter and be formally adopted as the family's son and heir. Both countries share the prejudice against darker skin tones that many cultures have. The greater prejudice against non-white American military personnel was pretty obvious. So, as noticed in the video, immigration is not favorably looked upon, with exceptions. Immigration by the descendents of emigrants is sought, especially in Japan. In Korea there was a prejudice against Korean-Americans who didn't speak the language or retain the culture. Teaching mixed Asian classes in the US for several decades, I noticed a number Korean Japanese relationships sometimes leading to marriage. In Japan the population decline has especially affected the countrysides. Farmers have been known to import wives from the Philippines and other countries who are willing to live and work on farms and continue the family. Sorry, this has become too long. I will be happy to answer questions.
I'm guessing the dislike of US servicemen is due to their low social prestige and bad reputation (for crime especially). The farmer thing is interesting and sounds like a major problem, I know that Tokyo is the socially prestigious place to be and they have major problems with the sex industry as that is how many women have to fund living there. I wonder what the solutions would be other than a campaign of national shame. Which is unlikely to happen given that western influence is starting to cause things to spiral.
@@vorynrosethorn903 The prejudice is more likely tied to education and income levels, which is also true of the reactions of Australian and British men to American service men associating with their women. As mentioned, Koreans put the family's prospects well ahead of the individual's prospects. Having a mere daughter help the family by marrying a wealthy foreigner was therefore acceptable, if not the most desirable consequence.
but China already overtook USA in GDP (ppp) its lacking behind in nominal GDP only because Beijing intentionally lowers yuan to usd conversion to make its exports more competitive in reality, China overtook USA back in 2016 they can increase yuan price whenever they want and overtake USA in nominal GDP too, but that wouldn't be in their best interests as it would decrease profits from exports
It's a difference in degree. 1.5 children per woman is painful. 0.8 children per woman is utterly terminal. Especially since European birth rate declines happened gradually.
24:59 If east asians have such high academic ability, how is it possible that almost all major scientific inventions during the atomic era came from western europe, and america and eastern europe, while some came from japan? So my theory is that since the atomic era, east asians have suffered from a technological and scientific gap. Their economies popped off compared to other developing countries mainly because of technology transfer from western europe and america. For example, the high speed rail network in east asia, whose technology comes from germany and japan. Now, with western competition, east asians realized just how difficult it is to close that scientific gap that has been lagging since the atomic era. They have to now invest more in research and development, which is draining the society from hobbies and prioritizing families.
@@jmgonzales7701That is sort of true in a way, Anywhere where Atheism is thriving the birth rates go low for some reason and Idk, Atheisms population also won’t be increasing much, A lot of western society become Atheists but the birth rates decrease and this is according to statistics not assumptions, I don’t know the reason though so I definitely would have to luck into that
All countries which adopted feminism face the same problem. Women which study till 25 and work, cannot be mothers. When they decide to have children, they have to give up any idea to have professional success despite of their university degrees. Men which don't earn enough, to maintain four persons, don't found a family, specially when 50 percent of all couples are divorced and the man remains with the costs but without family.
Feminism is not the prob- Europe has the leastt problem - It's much worse in Asia (no feminism) and trajectory of yearly birthrate over time is worse in south America And Most of Africa (no feminism) - It's a fertilisatioon decliine In humans globally
@@Rowlph8888 population in Europe is only increasing because of massive Immigration which destabilizes European societies. I see it every day. At the entrance of the main church of my home town stood heavy armed police at Christmas. Ten years before that was not necessary. I am absolutely sure, that will become a normal view in all big cities of western Europe in the next decades. But concerning fertilisation decline you are right. That is an additional reason. The first hints concerning fertilisation decline in the west I could read in the 80th. PS. Feminism is less influential in east asian societies ( South Corea), but it exists.
@@schurlbirkenbach1995 Oh, I agree with you that it's a problem(The joke that they call Feminism, In 21st-century), but I'm saying that people are missing that it's not the "MAIN" problem, which everyone seems to be missing, which is clearly, pollution, and toxic consumption since late 20th and early 21st-century in different parts of the world and which is affecting the fertility of humans everywhere, whicch is of far worse potential. *Birthrates have followed a predictable transfer from Europe going below replacement levels in the mi mid 1970's (particularly Germany and Italy), and then through the1st world Asian countries In the early 1980's and now South America and effectively "the vast majority" of the developing and Third World are on a savagely Severe decline from what was 6-8 children per women before 15 years ago to 2-3 Children per woman Just last year - On current trajectory, these countries will be having Asian rates by next yearBut *Of the developed world, only USA, France, UK, scandinavia, Israel and Australia have decent birthrates, which are salvageable with good immigration policy- And in Africa, for example, it's only Niger and Nigeria, and a few others - everyone else is plummeting.
@@Rowlph8888 Afghanistan fertility rate in 2001 (before American occupation) was 6.7 children per woman In 2021 (American withdrawal) it was 4.1 due to the introduction of feminism (although to just Kabul and parts of Kandahar since NATO didn't have full control over Afghanistan during 20 years) After Taliban banned women education and in just 2 years it's 4.5 now
If you look at the data worldwide, the lack of religiosity appears most highly correlated to high suicide rates and low birthrates. I think you could extend "religiosity" be understood as metaphysics and an alternatively to materialism.
Because a lot of things can be written off as "a divine plan." Including unplanned pregnancies. In addition, the idea of being rewarded with Heaven will motivate people to make the best decisions possible. And the idea of it's opposite is what dissuades people from doing bad stuff. Or being rude to people. Also, you have a safe place to go to once every week. Where people won't act like a jerk to you. That's the culture we had for hundreds of years. So, it's tough to find an adequate replacement for it. Especially in cultures that keep pushing for Laissez-Faire ideas. It worked for a while 60 years ago. But now it's just morphed into something ugly. Because there's no control of the people who abuse it.
Lack of religiosity doesn't track that much for low birthrate. Some countries that are highly religiosity (or at least low non-religious %) have low birth rate as well. It is possible that religiosity or some culture perk makes suicide rate higher because there is no stigma in killing one self. Religion may actually be a risk factor. It is very inconsistent factor. I'd say temperature is a much bigger factor. Another factor is if the country is poor or rich. Another misconception. Poor developing nations can have low birthrate.
That doesn't matter, what does is that the social norms promoted by religion include large families, a positive attitude towards children and a hatred of contraceptives. At least within Christianity.
I think i have a demographic collapse obsession. When i saw a the screenshot of peter zeihan, I laughed out loud! Love all of your videos! Keep up the good work!
elves are immortal, East Asians are just slightly smarter versions of us, have very low birth rate and only Japan and South Korea out of all Eastern Asian lives longer than the western european ones all other asian countries that are at a similar development as Europe live similar lifespans or even lower.
Well, in Japan, I still hear success stories of some towns and cities (such as Nagareyama, Nagi, and Akashi) increasing fertility rates. All of these are unheard of in China, South Korea, or Taiwan.
our time in this world is finite, wether it is our nature to populate or not . let nature takes its course, plus a lot of people are not controlled by nature. we can see it in the amount of people not wanting children. @@jostnamane3951
If you think discrimination based on race is done in American top universities. You are wrong. They will just do it in a roundabout manner. The amount of Whites in universitites have been declining. But at the same time the amount of Jews have been increasing significantly. If African Americans would go Ivy league universities based on merit they would represent less than 1 percent of the student body.
North Korea already has a sub replacement fertility. And despite what people may think, the government can't just mandate people to have children. You can not expect that from millions of people. The NK fertility will collapse to other East Asian levels. But it will be a lost worse since North Korea isn't even a developed country. It grew old before it grew rich. This will 100% result in the fall of Kim Dynasty. TLDR: It will collapse.
Everyone kinda lived a bit of a lie that things can continue in perpetuity and the old ways of life with impossible struggles and leaving people to die in poverty would never return. Looks like we've all made the return of such things inevitable.
@kaiserbauch9092 well yeah, this is a bit more precise description of what the whole thing you're getting at means practically on the human level. Not to doom pill too much, it's all predicated on trends continuing without interventions
European countries had more time to adjust via natural selection but the process is still ongoing because it hasn't reversed yet. This will play out differently in East Asia as they are getting blasted full force with their populace's inability to breed in the modern era.
You vastly overestimate historical China's policies regarding demographics. They had no institutional plans to restrain population size, but rather their population size would hit a cap that would force China into civil war and they would kill enough people that it wouldn't be a problem for a while. The cycle of unification, decadence, degradation, shattering, and reunification is a well known area of study in Chinese history. Besides, Malthus was simply wrong. The increase in food production isn't linear, not even close to it. He simply didn't have enough perspective to see the curve at such an early time. Agriculture is heavily dependent on technology and the pattern of food production plateauing only for some person or society to develop a new technology to overcome that gap is one we have seen regularly. From irrigation, to crop rotation, fertilization, to seed drills, to combustion driven tractors, to the GMO. Malthus was just wrong. In the same way, I think a lot of the thinking around fertility is just wrong as well. Now, I could be way off the mark here, but I have sneaking suspicion that birth rates are going to get a little higher in the West over time. It isn't necessarily that people don't want families, but they very much don't want to have one early in their life anymore. I think we are going to see parents become more of a thing for people in the 30-40 year range, because bluntly, who has time for that before then?
@@kaiserbauch9092 Don't get me wrong, I am not debating its use. But GIGO is in effect. Evidence shows the contrary and more and more analysts are dumping the idea. Because the more people you have the more the odds grow of individuals and their interactions making the resource curve go exponential and surpass the population curve. This model in fact is a better match for historical results. This is why every "carrying capacity" of the earth keeps being proven wrong. Now if you wish to claim the east Asians operate on Malthusian assumptions, I will agree.
@@ChairmanKam Lets Add to that that there is mostly likely a non linear effect of population growth on economic development and that on average we have more resources with bigger populations. Scientific Evidence: Non Linear Studies: Study 5 The non-linear effect of population growth and linear effect of age structure on per capita income: a threshold dynamic panel structural model Abstract: This paper investigates the non-linear effect of population growth and linear effects of age structure on per capita income, using the threshold dynamic structural panel (TDSP) and non-linear generalized method of moments (NGMM) Models. A data set from 81 countries (both developing and developed) covering a 50-year period is used. The results indicate that there is a non-linear relationship between population growth and per capita income. Population growth rate before the zero percent threshold has a significant and positive impact on per capita income, while no significant impact is found after the threshold. Therefore, the optimistic view can be adopted for developed countries where population growth rate is low. In contrast, the neutralist view is applicable in countries where population growth is relatively high. Study 6 Demographic change and economic growth: An inverted-U shape relationship Abstract The cross-country regression and non-parametric kernel estimation using the panel data from OECD countries over the 1960-2000 periods show the inverted-U shape relationship between demographic changes and economic growth; growth rates initially increase and then decrease with population aging Study 7 Nonlinear effects of population aging on economic growth Abstract: Using panel data for 142 countries for the period from 1960 to 2014, we assess the effects of population aging on economic growth. We find that population aging proxied by old-age population share (or old-age dependency ratio) negatively affects economic growth only when it reaches a certain high level and its negative effects grow stronger as population aging deepens. The nonlinear relationship between population aging and economic growth is associated with the historical nonlinear relationship between the shares of old and working-age population. Population growth = Innovation Study 8 POPULATION GROWTH AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE: ONE MILLION B.C. TO 1990 Abstract: The nonrivalry of technology, as modeled in the endogenous growth literature, implies that high population spurs technological change. This paper constructs and empirically tests a model of long-run world population growth combining this implication with the Malthusian assumption that technology limits population. The model predicts that over most of history, the growth rate of population will be proportional to its level. Empirical tests support this prediction and show that historically, among societies with no possibility for technological contact, those withlarger initial populations have had faster technological change and population growth. Economic development and population growth: an inverted-U shaped curve? Abstract There has been a large debate on the relations between demography and economic development. Our paper discusses the possibility that there exists an inverted-U curve, similar in shape to Kuznets’s curve, between the growth rate of population and the growth rate of the per-capita GDP. The crosscountry empirical analysis, carried out on over 90 countries in the period 1980-2010, seems to confirm the existence of this kind of curve. The main reasons behind this phenomenon are discussed. First, it is difficult to sustain a high economic growth either with a low (lower than 0.5%) or high (higher than 2- 2.5%) growth rate of population. In the first case, an excessive ageing of population causes the wellknown negative consequences. In the second case,thepossibilities of large households of providing children with adequate nourishment, education and health are reduced. Moreover, without a perfect capital market, it is difficult to promote new firms and innovation unless adequate personal or family resources are available Studies Population growth and resources Care to Wager Again? An Appraisal of Paul Ehrlich’s Counterbet Offer to Julian Simon, Part 1: Outcomes Objective. This paper provides the first comprehensive assessment of the outcome of Paul Ehrlich and Stephen Schneider’s counteroffer (1995) to economist Julian Simon following Ehrlich’s loss in the famous Ehrlich-Simon wager on economic growth and the price of natural resources (1980- 1990). Methods. Literature review, data gathering and critical assessment of the indicators and proxies suggested or implied by Ehrlich and Schneider. Critical assessment of Simon’s reasons for rejecting the bet. Data gathering for his alternative indicators. Results. For indicators that can be measured satisfactorily, the balance of the outcomes favors the Ehrlich-Schneider claims for the initial ten-year period. Extending the timeline and accounting for the measurement limitations or dubious relevance of many of their indicators, however, shifts the balance of the evidence towardsSimon perspective. Conclusion. Although the outcomes favour the Ehrlich-Schneider claims for the initial ten-year period, Ehrlich and Schneider.s indicators yielded mixed results in the long run. Simon’s preferred indicators of direct human welfare would yield largely favourable outcomes if the bet were extended into the present. Based on this, we claim that Simon’s optimistic perspective was once again largely validated. Care to Wager Again? An Appraisal of Paul Ehrlich’s Counterbet Offer to Julian Simon, Part 2: Critical Analysis Objective. This paper provides the first comprehensive assessment of the outcome of Paul Ehrlich’s and Stephen Schneider’s counteroffer (1995) to economist Julian Simon following Ehrlich’s loss in the famous Ehrlich-Simon wager on economic growth and the price of natural resources (1980- 1990). Our main conclusion in a previous article is that, for indicators that can be measured satisfactorily or can be inferred from proxies, the outcome favors Ehrlich-Schneider in the first decade following their offer. This second article extends the timeline towards the present time period to examine the long-term trends of each indicator and proxy, and assesses the reasons invoked by Simon to refuse the bet. Methods. Literature review, data gathering, and critical assessment of the indicators and proxies suggested or implied by Ehrlich and Schneider. Critical assessment of Simon’s reasons for rejecting the bet. Data gathering for his alternative indicators. Results. For indicators that can be measured directly, the balance of the outcomes favors the Ehrlich-Schneider claims for the initial ten-year period. Extending the timeline and accounting for the measurement limitations or dubious relevance of many of their indicators, however, shifts the balance of the evidencetowards Simon’s perspective. Conclusion. The fact that Ehrlich and Schneider’s own choice of indicators yielded mixed results in the long run, coupled with thefactthatSimon’s preferred indicators of direct human welfare yielded largely favorable outcomes is, in our opinion, sufficient to claim that Simon’s optimistic perspective was largely validated. I Also Recommend Books on the issue Books: Superabundance: The Story of Population Growth, Innovation, and Human Flourishing on an Infinitely Bountiful Planet For centuries, the ivory towers of academia have echoed this sentiment of multitudinous ends and limited means. In this supremely contrarian book, Tupy and Pooley overturn the tables in the temple of conventional thinking. They deploy rigorous and original data and analysis to proclaim a gospel of abundance. Economics―and ultimately, politics―will be enduringly transformed.” ―George Gilder, author of Life after Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy Generations of people have been taught that population growth makes resources scarcer. In 2021, for example, one widely publicized report argued, “The world's rapidly growing population is consuming the planet's natural resources at an alarming rate . . . the world currently needs 1.6 Earths to satisfy the demand for natural resources . . . [a figure that] could rise to 2 planets by 2030.” But is that true? After analyzing the prices of hundreds of commodities, goods, and services spanning two centuries, Marian Tupy and Gale Pooley found that resources became more abundant as the population grew. That was especially true when they looked at “time prices,” which represent the length of time that people must work to buy something. To their surprise, the authors also found that resource abundance increased faster than the population―a relationship that they call “superabundance.” On average, every additional human being created more value than he or she consumed. This relationship between population growth and abundance is deeply counterintuitive, yet it is true. Why? More people produce more ideas, which lead to more inventions. People then test those inventions in the marketplace to separate the useful from the useless. At the end of that process of discovery, people are left with innovations that overcome shortages, spur economic growth, and raise standards of living. But large populations are not enough to sustain superabundance―just think of the poverty in China and India before their respective economic reforms. To innovate, people must be allowed to think, speak, publish, associate, and disagree. They must be allowed to save, invest, trade, and profit. In a word, they must be free.
Malthusian catastrophe was just a theoretical speculation based on the assumption of steady birth rate and inefficient agriculture (the discovery of the Haber process and chemical fertilizers made it unrealistic). Although it almost happened in some regions of the world when population growth started to stress the rate of production like in the horn of Africa, Poland at the beginning of XX century and in Bengala.
@@ChairmanKam I am not sure I quiet understand your point. If we look at a pre-industrial society, how exactly is population growth supposed to lead to higher agricultural output?
There was no "Meiji dynasty". There was Meiji period that was equivalent to the period when one particular emperor ruled. (This emperor is traditionally posthumously named emperor Meiji.)
To be honest it's much more realistic that east asians would go extinct before Europeans. Although it's dark for Europeans I feel like Europeans still have a chance to bounce back in the future. But for east asia, there is too much culture to change like working culture gender roles to have replacement fertility and east asians don't want change.
4:20 Well if thats the case, the same thing could be applied to the rest of the Asian countries you mentioned such as Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan etc. Each of these countries have a completely different situation from each other including culture, politics and society.
It's obvious bro= Pollution, GM foods + pesticides + Additives and preservatives + all other chemicals - even Africa and South America have recently gone from 6-8 Kids per woman (15 years ago) to 2-3, last year.the trajectory is catastrophic, and it's haappenin In all continents- Even immigration is going to dry up Soon, because even most the Africans are running out Of young People
It will be interesting to see because nearly all Central Asian countries are experiencing a rise in their birth rates. I think it has something to do with the resurgence of religion.
@@FuntimeByzantium Population is power. As a Turk, i want strong Turkic states. I also want Turkic people to migrate Turkey. If we are going to need new population, it must be other Turkic brothers/sisters.
The close family culture in East Asia is a "2 edge sword" for low birth rates. On the one hand, the family culture encourages people to get married and have children. On the other hand, there is no taboo for children to continue living with their parents after the children reach adulthood. Assuming good responsible children who goes to school and get a job, living with parents is cheap and safe. There is little incentive to take a chance to find love and build a family, especially for the women.
Something happened in the 1970-80-s. The current system is not compatible with human evolution. We simply cannot reproduce in a system like this, like the rest of the developed world. I like the term human resources because I think I also describes the problems. Humans can be considered a resource, and if used too much then its gets depleted.
There is a very crucial difference between plague and ageing. Plague will mostly kill the weaker, elderly and children, but it will left you with the prime-age population as the most robust age group. With ageing a sub-replacememt fertility, you will end with society with very high median age and very few young people.
@@kaiserbauch9092 the plague affected young adults the most of all, the age group that was most important of all during that age; www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3094018/#:~:text=At%20face%20value%2C%20these%20results,adults%20and%20very%20old%20adults. Result was an appreciation in human labour and start of the end for feudalism. There are some positive aspects too
@@kenpe1455 The plague effected what we consider "young adults" the most because a majority of the population would fall under that category. The average age back then was much, much younger than today. It disproportionately effected elderly and young children the most, that's pretty indisputable.
@@shadowyshadow6498 did you read the study I posted? Quote:"compared to normal medieval mortality, the Black Death disproportionately affected young adults and very old adults" so we're talking about a crucial part of the working age population.
@@kenpe1455 the study you posted does not contain this quote. What it does contain, though, is "The results of this study indicate that older adults faced higher risks of dying during the Black Death compared to younger individuals." which is the complete opposite of what you claim.
24:04 😅it honestly did go off the rails there. The subtitles you add when you make a small or large mispronunciation are indeed helpful or at the least mindful!
29:26 I've been thinking along the same lines regarding East Asia's treatment of the elderly after this crisis. What initially starts as the elderly starving to death because people can't support them becomes ingrained as a morbid, culturally expected practice of suicide upon retirement. Just like the infanticide of yesteryear, this is deeply horrifying.
It is truly disturbing.
There was a Japanese movie* discussing different "nightmare scenarios" for Japan, from Fallout-style bunker lifestyles to state-mandated euthanasia for the elderly past a certain age.
I think those elderly without any children would be "strongly encouraged" by their governments to end their lives through euthanasia, or very heavy taxes might be imposed on those childless retirees to compensate.
East Asia has historically been home to some of the most gruesome practices in human history, so these solutions are definitely on the table.
In Japan's case, Seppuku was a standard practice for the Samurai class wherein you'd commit ritual suicide if you bring shame to your clan. So, as you said, the cultural foundations are already there, albeit they'd have to be massively scaled up.
Yes that came to my mind when the topic of infanticide came up. It is truly disturbing thought.
But unfortunately I think it would be realistic...
Maybe alongside the social credit system. You did not contribute to society = you dont get any pensions, health care, what so ever
It's also in line with the Confucianism and be packaged like "the old shall not burden the young".
It may become a socially reinforced duty to commit suicide once you become a "net loss" to society (retirement, social security, illnesses) with the old who do not "fulfill their duty" being looked at with scorn by the wider society i.e. "my grandpa committed suicide for the country, but why are you selfishly living?"
Eventually the government will reflect the will of the people and enact laws that levy high taxes on the old, cut back welfare, etc.
As a Mongolian I agree with your assessment about Mongolia being a "different" animal than China, Japan and Korea. Although Mongolia shares the same time zones as China, and Mongolians look similar to Chinese, especially Northern Chinese, we don't have anything in common. Culturally we have more in common with the Central Asian Turkic countries, except for 2 major differences:
1. Language: Mongolians speak Mongolian which is mutually unintelligible with Mandarin, Cantonese or any of the Turkic languages. While Central Asians speak their native Turkic languages, plus Russian.
2. Religion: the state religion of Mongolia is Buddhism, although most people are not religious. While Central Asians are Muslims, but moderate compared to Arabic countries.
So, basically we're the eastern-most Central Asians, similar to how Czechs are western-most Slavs.
Mongolians look pretty distinct to me, almost central Asian but with noticable Siberian and Chinese influences.
@@ether158
Some Mongolians look mixed.
@@Omcs234nah most cant tell the different between chinese and mongolian lmao, inner mongolia is in china and outermongolia was stolen by the ussr technically mongolian is supposed to be an ethnicity in china like manchus
@@NeostormXLMAX
And that doesn't change the fact that some Mongolians look somewhat mixed.
There's a LOT of Chinese with Mongolian ancestry and vice versa. Remember the Yuan and Qing dynasties?
Anthropologist Susan Greenhalgh, along with other researchers, has shown that nearly all of China’s fertility decline happened before the One-Child Policy started in 1979. They essentially closed the barn door after the horses had bolted. It did seem to have an outsized impact on sex ratio at birth, though.
I was just in Seoul and Busan with my twin baby daughters. Many parts of Seoul are like a super orderly scene from Children of Men. What made it strange is that EVERYBODY is super kid-friendly. Not in an intrusive way; just very kind and curious about babies. Having lived in all the other East Asian countries where fertility has collapsed, this contradiction between positivity toward babies, and the failure to produce more of their own, was really striking in Korea. A real pity.
The more you care the less kids you have. it's a horrible paradox
like overprotective parenting being a disaster for child development
English folks seem very sympathetic and nice too and are hypocrite devils inside
Normal. Take any high school girl talking how she absolutely can't stand them little brats and how happy she is to know she will never give birth to one, invite her over to see her friend's newborn baby and watch as she oggles all over it for two hours straight.
@@yarpen26 just biology.
@@yarpen26 horrible. I don't think societies that embraced such norms are going to last for a long time. Either hostile societies will replace them or maybe sometimes in the future they will go full handmaid's tale to change the outcomes.
@@jostnamane3951full replacement is unlikely, most likely scenario is that conservative demographic forces very slowly take over the countries tough unusually high fertility rate, it already has happened in Israel, look at their government
Nationalist forces can too take over and quite quickly, put pro-natalist policies, the effects of those pro-natalist policies are in fact effective, is just that the fertility rates are so low that such a thing is not enough, countries in Eastern Europe did go from numbers around 1.1-1.3 to numbers like 1.4-1.6, which isn't enough,
the lack of strictly traditionalist demographic forces will likely lead to a very slow recovery of population growth as housing prices plummet and abandoned houses start to be resettled, the combination of progressive values with traditionalism may work as well, with more out of wedlock births being allowed, however out of wedlock births tend socially problematic in the long run,
By looking at a map, you realize that, Tokyo fertility rate is 1 child per women with is far below average, it's population keeps growing because of internal migration, but after some time it will decline even with immigration leading to a eventual recover in population growth, but this can take decades, If not more than a century
Yeah, so there's a correlation between speed of industrialisation and the speed of falling birthrates. The trend is the same around the world, but the speed is very different.
A lot of people forget one of the more important factors in this - The societal and cultural views on marriage, children and the like. This has been the case ever since the rapid secularisation, feminist and sexual movements that have been present in the west since the late 60s.
@@mrvictorian4004 people simply have a lot more choices nowadays (travel, hobbies, luxuries, leisure, entertainment), and as a parent let me tell you, kids are a lot of hard work while your own needs go on the back burner. I totally get why people wouldn't want to make the sacrifices in constraints imposed, money spent and time and energy expended.
Plus kids were a large part of your retirement planning as well as reinsurance generally. The social state now does that to a large degree (pensions, Healthcare, social services, retirement homes etc) so that need completely falls off too...
Yes, we have failed as a civilization, we cannot maintain a replacement birth rate at the same time we get industrialized, we suck, we're doomed!
Make man machine and they stop producing human
Yes, but other regionally-specific trends are also in play.
As a Taiwanese, I'd say the reason why we and East Asia has low birth rate us because we practice elitism. We all want our kids to learn foreign language, have musical instrument lessons, sending them to tutoring class for good grades, all these costs a lot of money, and our economy despite being strong, but it has been stuck the same for about 20 years.
Japan and Taiwan all have similar economic situations, in Taiwan, our salary isn't increased much compared to 20 years ago, but cost of living is increasing over these 20 years. Japan calling themselves having a "Lost 20 years"(now they're calling it Lost 30 years because it's hitting the 30th year) same problem with income is not increasing much, but people's desire and expectations are higher than any other previous generations.
South Korea is similar like Taiwan from what I know talking with my Korean friends, we are literally fighting for who has the lowest birth rate for recent years lol.
But they definitely are getting a lot of foreign women and men moving to Korea because of K pop. Taiwan is getting a significant amount of foreigners coming to our country than before too, but not as much compared to Japan and Korea
It's happening everywhere bro, even in Africa and South America they have gone from 6-8 child Per woman to 2-3 In the last 15 years. Soon even immigration will not be a solution for Europe, because there's young people Drtrying Up in Developing world also
@@Rowlph8888when Africa will have problems with newborn, we will be dead by 100 years
The Chinese government has much more diverse policy tools than other countries, such as forcibly ordering large state-owned enterprises, universities, and hospitals in Beijing and Shanghai to relocate to nearby cities to reduce population concentration and prevent excessive competition. And by implementing a strict household registration system, the population of Beijing and Shanghai has started to decrease in the past two years, spreading to other small and medium-sized cities, which may increase some fertility rates. Japan and South Korea are also making efforts to alleviate the population in the capital, but it seems that the effect is not as significant as that of China
China’s government is very good at mobilizing more totally than democratic nations can, however it takes a while to mobilize. This can be seen in the fact that the ccp only just, a decade and a half after it was clear that the one child policy was a mistake, allowed people to have three children.
Furthermore, the construction of the party apparatus discourages nuanced or measured approaches. This can be seen in their absurd levels of FAI in infrastructure and the negative side effects seen the property market today.
That same system did policy that destroyed them. If you give government too much power they will f it up because by & large of corruption & incompetence.
We will see, but I would honestly not be too hopeful in this regard.
While true on paper, you can see how it often isn't how things turn out in the real world. You don't even have to look that far behind. It'd Covid Zero policy, as far as QoL and economic measures are concerned, was a failure. Instead of adapting the policy with the evolution of the diseases, the CCP is stacked with yes-men with no room for self-reflection, self-evaluation, and trajectory changes.
@@spartanparty3894I think their problem is not planning a selfsustainable housing
because commerce is totally concentrated on shores building more adds to traffic and congestion spiking prices of housing where jobs and opportunities are what squizzes peoples will to have more kids
people from all china are pressuring big cities moving in
but they could still build more decentralised self-sufficient towns everywhere around China with good agriculture around
they just build buildings and think people will magically decide to living there
what ended up opposite as they started building these just to flip them as investment
destroying any chances for people to move in and actually build any organic economy there 😂
and without these their reservoir of people will lower life expectations will dry up fast so there will be no supply of good hardworking people to move to their factories anymore
while old people support will create really psychopathic choices in terms of policies and behaviour of ppl to mitigate new unnatural problems
Exceptional video. I have heard many people bemoan the oncoming demographic collapse, but not a single one consider how the culture might change after the collapse to adapt.
I highly doubt it will adapte in time, not in current East Asia economic pressure.
@Embassy_of_Jupiter
Partially the rise of atheism and secularism is responsile for the population decline.
While it may be dangerous the masses do need an ideology or religion to base their existence upon.
The alternative is mass unhappiness population decline, suicides and unrest and it won't matter how much the economy improves.
If you lift up the median income you just simply set a new standard for the rat race.
Thank you very much!
@Embassy_of_JupiterBack? Maybe Muslim ones cuz Christianity is dying
@@ChristianDoretti Muslim countries are also under demographic decline to a small extent, except maybe Iraq & West Bank. Only African countries have huge birth rates.
Great video. Small correction, it was under emperor Meiji, not the Meiji dynasty. The Yamato family is Japan's ruling dynasty, and had done so since the 6th century.
Thanks for that, gonna keep it in mind!
@@kaiserbauch9092 Japan names it's era's (like Meiji or Showa era) after its emperors (although that tradition started with Meiji)
I thought they were the ruling dynasty going back before Christ?
@@holdenennisthe legend says that they have been ruling Japan since 600 bc but it was likely government propaganda of that time to legitimize the rule of the emperor. Basically if your family is tied to the most important God in shinto you will be less likely to be overthrown, and I guess it worked.
@@holdenennis It's kinda shrouded in myth. There are no evidence of Yamato emperors before the the 6th. It's all oral tradition. It's kinda how the first few dynasties of China are mythical without much, if any evidence of their existence.
As an east asian, I would like to talk about the truth of low birth rate. High living and study pressure, high housing price, low social mobility, disparity are the main reasons. These are so called 吃子文化 which means overdraw the future. Poeple feel despair and hopeless about the society. Thus, they do not want to bring these pain to the next generation. Thus, east asians ususally do not want to birth. Women career is the minor reason. In east asia, women having birth means that they need to give up their careers because women need to take care of babies. Many highly educated women do not want to give up their careers, thus, they prefer not to birth.
These narratives are highly speculative, and frankly they're lined with self pity which undermines their credibility. One might as well say that they've angered the fertility god, and so birth rates have gone down.
May you should ask yourself. If its job your looking. Who will be your customers?
People who choose it to have kids because it would disrupt their careers and not wanting their descendants to suffer are unknowingly practicing Margaret Sangers Eugenics at population control. It's selfish materialism plain and simple. Those who value their own material wealth above all would only have children if it's trendy.
Yes, it’s a capitalist system issue: who wants to birth the next generation if they and the next generations suffer for life so that the high class gets richer at their expense?
@@cjgparas3 Seniors.
As a Thai, so a sort of east asian, here are my guesses:
1. Total lack of religion. Most countries in the region have nothing to believe in. Vietnam and China are very ireeligious, and Taoism and Shinto were barely even religions in the first place. Communism is also directly anti-family and tradition.
2. Social discipline. The way some of these countries work is that they focus on a single thing, like a national project, and then when they change that, their societies change totally. You can see this in how South Korea was poorer than India 70 years ago, or how Japan went from Edo to Meiji, skipping like 500 years in the west. Thus since their “national project” is economic growth, happiness and essentials are abandoned. I think this also means they will get a family backlash, and it will be super harsh.
3. Economic. Most of these countries are very urban, and it is nearly impossible to have a child and still be making money in their big cities. I remember watching a Japanese gameshow, where someone mentioned that she was born in Tokyo, and the others were totally shocked, since that city’s birthrate is near nonexistent.
4. Sexual repression: these countries traditionally oppress sex, and you basically never talk about sex or even stuff like, what you like in a girl in most places, like classrooms, offices, parks etc. in the US, you talk about which girl you like after class. In Korea, you talk about what you should read for the test. In the UK, if you sleep in the same bed as somebody, you are expected to have sex with them. In Thailand, entire families aged up to 15 still sleep in the same bed, and nothing sexual is expected to happen. I’m not exaggerating btw, our societeis are really that anti-sex.
1. Communism doesn't have anything to do with the lack of families. There were countries with massive "baby booms" during the supposed communist era. Government policy and social advancement is more to blame. Irreligion doesn't seem, necessarily, to be the main cause either, but rather some adjacent cultural development, because Japan and South Korea have even more abysmal birth rates despite the presence of even very traditional religion.
2. This just seems like a guess, honestly. I don't think social regimentation in these countries is a particularly good reason why birth rates are particularly bad. It doesn't seem to me like people are individually making the choice to have one or no kids just because that's what the country is working towards. There are deeper issues with family culture, work culture and generally a very unhealthy social organization for these countries.
3. The first real good reason, though still not quite. Urbanization didn't kill birth rates when people were dirt poor and starving in slums in the 1800s, so why is it doing so when people are living relatively way better?
4. Oppression of sex was never really a good factor for preventing birth rates. People slept in the same beds in the 1800s and such and birth rates were sky-high, also despite very puritan views on sex. Poor sexual education or an unhealthy, sex-negative culture actually tend to make people have more children on accident because they know so little about what they're doing. I would say that instead there is something about how we are being raised or developing socially where the desire for sex, companionship and children is just steadily on the decline. This is happening both in the comparatively sex-positive West and the East.
There's a correlation between the speed of industrialisation and the speed of falling birthrates. The trend (decreasing fertility) is the same around the world but the speed varies significantly.
Thailand which is very religious with Buddhism as the state religion has a lower fertility rate (1.34) than irreligious Vietnam (1.96). In Europe, irreligious Czechia has a higher fertility rate (1.71) than deeply Catholic Poland (1.38).
@@liamthomas8029 it's Religious on Paper not in practice, Vietnam is not quite irreligious it's just that they cannot declare their religion in Poland for example people are not really Enthusiastic about their Catholicism, it's the Active Church Goes that matter to the fertility since those who just claim to be Christian or whatever mean nothing to the Demographics and are usually on a similar situation to the Irreligious.
@@Pedrinluigi1. I think irreligion defenitely plays a big part, I mean definitely not the biggest but still there since there aretoo many examples. I mean Japan is less developed than Israel, South Korea than Qatar and China than Mexico yet those latter three have far higherbirthrates than their counterparts.
2. Yeah, its honestly just a guess lol. Still I think that point stands generally regardless of its effect on the birthrate.
3. Well because in 1800 most of your children would die, almost everyone was religious , most people lived outside cities, and in the cities you did indeed see lower birthrates. Also agriculture is very pro-natalist. You can see this in the US, in which rural, religious, and especially farmers, or at least those who don’t work in a big company have more children. The fact that also everyone in East Asia works in a company or have industrial jobs would also help explain it.
4. You are right in saying those things have a big effect, however I think the fact that sex is even on the table does make people want to do it more. The dating scene is also horrible, most people remain single at 30, and almost no one would be ok with their children having kids at less than 20. Although in saying that, I do think this is a less significant factor than 1 and 3.
Taiwan and South Korea had a decline in fertility rate as China but are richer, that's why I think the one child policy did affect a even bigger decline of what should have been
Neither taiwan or south korea is richer than china.
@@harukrentz435They are richer than China in terms of individual median income.
Since when China is richer??
@@unka2007 hello, China is large, China's GDP per capita is $12,800, but east China's GDP per capita is more than $25,000, there are more than 7 billion people in the world, there are 2.4 billion people over $12,800, of which China accounts for 1.4 billion.
@@玉佳瓏 @@玉佳瓏 Not all 1.4B in china produce more than $12,000. It's average. So it's more right to say half of that 1.4B produce more than $12,000.
And excluding inland China is ridiculous. Africa is a utopia if you exclude certain places like that.
The real reasons for low birth rates in Asia are:
- the high cost which rules out raising children for a LOT of people (housing, education)
- the affect raising children will have on parents' careers.
These two issues are both solvable. However governments like Korea and Japan have done nothing but throw money at the problem.
China's government will be much more competent at solving the root of the issue, but countries like Germany have seen successes, even with smaller policy changes.
In conclusion, the cause of low birth rates is really obvious. The solution is also less complicated than many think, however it requires strong societal and structural changes within areas such as housing and work culture.
The housing solution is multi-generational homes and not giving everyone an individual room. Also Japan has very cheap rural housing but everyone moves to the city to try for jobs that largely aren't available and haven't been since the crash.
Westerners keep lying about china, exaggerating this problem as if they cant change it lmao, the chinese government is extremely long term planning, also confucianism was mostly destroyed in the cultural revolution,
Elders were beaten to death by children encouraged by mao.
Only idiots think china is mostly confucian nowdays
Hell china doesnt even have the repspect elders shit, or the drinking with boss bullshit, they are attributing japanese problems to china, china literally abandoned even its bowing and traditions under the ccp
Thailand is going the South Korean route. it has a birthrate of 1.01. Bangkok is at 0.63. ethnic Thai are at 0.9 while foreigners are at 1.7.
I looked it up and the birth rate dropped 1.0 per year wtf happened?
@@Harry11endersonladyboys. That’s what happened
@@codysparks1454that’s fucking hilarious
@@codysparks1454 They have existed for centuries.
@@PowerSimplified1871 except that they are mainstream now. Which is a big difference between now and then
Super excited whenever you upload! Some of the best content I've seen in a while
Thank you very much!
In my country (Spain) we have a birth rate of children per woman that is the same or lower. It would be interesting if you made a video about the birth rate in southern Europe (Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal).
Like every other problem in Europe, it is vastly blown out of proportion and should population collapse happen it will be much more catastrophic in East Asia.
@@aircraft2 Spain came to have a fertility rate per woman of 1.14 in the 90s and from then on it only increased due to massive immigration, in fact the population of Spain and Portugal has only increased due to massive immigration while Greece and Italy have NOT They have received massive immigration because their people have not wanted to, they have seen their population decrease
@@Leviathan500 not reading all that
@@aircraft2 The demographic catastrophe of southern Europe will not be as bad as that of East Asia, but it will be close to that level. I repeat, we have a birth rate per woman very similar to that of East Asia.
@@Leviathan500 doomer mindset
The birth rate in East Asia is extremely low, but they are far from being the only such place in the world. Southern European countries have birth rates compared to Japan or China (S. Korea is another story). Latin America is a little behind, but I do think we'll reach similar levels if things continue the same. It is clear to me that big long term civilizational trends matters a lot, but I do think the main driver of this is either material (over-urbanization, overwork, high cost of raising children) or/and "small culture" (meaning, recent changes like the fact that children have vanished from people's view and incentives drive people more to work).
Your English doesn't have to be perfect and there's no need to continuously write those apology comments in the video. Native speakers are very used to hearing people speak our language with accents, it's no biggie.
Thank for that assurance!
@@kaiserbauch9092yeah you’re a lot better than most Americans like me! Only fluent in one & barely by any standard😅
Agree, as an working American we hear so many accents it seems normal. If I could not understand someone I would definitely politely ask them to repeat themselves - but not call a person out, that is very rude. If you are trying it is generally perceived as industrious and worthy of recognition. We all came here from somewhere else, or our parents or grandparents did - accented English is nothing to be self-conscious of.
Critically underrated channel brother - always look forward to your content
You definitely should cover the African continent sometime brother that would be interesting
Ugh that would be demonetized yesterday
@@M-tl4xt the guy is pretty analytical I think it’s something he could feasibly do
Thier issue is the opposite of east asia. Africa has alwyas been an underpopulated region and is economically behind as well as societally so it makes sense their birth rates would be higher to combat their higher death rate. The Increace of modern medicine is what’s making Africas growth so high compared to what it would be in the past.
Asia has always been heavily over populated so it makes sense
@@makeytgreatagain6256 who decides what is over and underpopulated? Africans don't seem capable of sustaining their massive population growth.
Thank you very much! I will, just need to research it more!
I have been facinated with population decline for a long time, and I am glad that it is currently getting more headwinds as compared to the past. As a Malaysian Chinese male nearing 25 years old, almost half of my Chinese friends are single, and many who are dating have nearly zero desire to have children. From my perspective, it seems that the main reason for this is that there is low desire to date due not having much interest, and they rather find happiness in material things such as eating good food with friends or buying material goods. For those who dont want children, they say that children is just a big burden.
Many often cite high cost of living as the main cause of low fertility, but I always thought that culture plays a bigger factor, because east asians have significantly lower birth rates than that of white cultures. In addition to the long standing cultural tradition of family size self regulation, i think there are also these further unique factors that contribute to a declining desire for children. Firstly, as another commenter has point out, is the lack of sex education. Many especially girls, feel ashamed when they discuss issues that have any sexual nature in it. Even many teachers who teach super basic knowledge about human sexual reproduction often feels awkward, and they never ever talk about it as a form of pleasure, but just the biological parts. This is quite prominent as I noticed many of my female friends feeling quite clueless when it comes to discussion regarding this issues, and some even.feeling disgusted.
The other factor is that growing up, especially in urban families, we are taught to focus only on studies, and to shun dating as it is a distraction. When we taught our kids to shun dating for the first 18 years or even up to university, how can we expect them to go out and find partners once they graduated? Many might have even maintain the mindset that a partner is just a distraction to one's career goals, therefore thinking they are mutually exclusive. Meanwhile, even for those who wants to find a partner, they might not know how to do so, and the cost of finding someone who is not suited for you increases significantly.
Another factor which compounds on the fact that we are taught to shun dating since a young age, is that we become very materlistic. East asian cultures, especially the Chinese, place a lot of importance on material wealth. The society basically shuns people who are lower educated, working lower paying jobs, etc. Chinese society also enshrines people who owns many 'assets', which is we often love as real estate so much, as it is culturally symbolic of ones wealth. This is another particular reason why although down payment requirements in China are so high at 30%, many families still insist to pool borrowed money from relatives to buy a home, sometimes for their son who is looking to get a wife.
There are still a few factors which negatively impact birth rates in our culture such as bride price, high property prices etc, but I hope to provide more cultural reasons for such a decline, as I believe culture has an equal or even more part to play as compared to economic reasons in declining birth rates in east asian cultures.
Thank you for reading!😊
i see more chinese in malaysia than malay, but the opposite in indonesia i guess you guys are fine
@@werren894 Current population is higher, but in future will.change a lot
The biggest reason I think of declining birth rate is that in industrialised nations people start expecting perfection from everything. If you want a partner, he has to be perfect. If they are to be parents, they have to be perfect parents. Kids should have good life only no deprivations. Kids have to be geniuses, cannot be stupid. This makes having kids a tiresome business. You need tutors, expensive education, expensive clothes, expensive vacations, expensive house. Otherwise you are a bad parent. Most people can't have good carrier and do all these jobs. So many remain childless and many are unmarried.
@@werren894That's likely because you've visited established city centers in Malaysia. Chinese diaspora are concentrated in city centers and industrial zones, hence the apparent disparity.
Source: Am Malaysian.
You’re spot on. I was raised in China and moved to Canada during my teens. There were always boys had crush on me, but somehow I felt ashamed by that, and I focused purely on school. And on the eve of going to university my mother told me I needed to find a potential husband in university 😂, and I had no clue how dating works, what boys were thinking. I was so oblivious. Now I feel like when I was younger, I was basically my mom’s machine, being told and programmed what to do.
I absolutely don't understand the view that "China's population is declining, so they will not ever catch up with USA". China has about 4 times greater population than USA. Even if their working population ratio is lower, and their productivity per worker grow to just half that of USA, they can catch up and surpass USA's economy. The graph at 16:26 is especially misleading, as it has wildly different scales for US and China working age population.
Also, if you think infanticide and senicide was not practices in Christian countries, you are very much mistaken. Perhaps it was a taboo topic, but poor communities have done it everywhere, regardless of religion.
And lastly - greater population leads to more competition for housing and jobs. It might be better for politicians and the rich, but if housing and life in general is unaffordable, it is not in individual's interest to have children. If governments were really interested in reversing the decline in fertility, they would make sure housing and childcare is affordable. Everything else is just milking the population.
I can't speak to productivity per worker but I believe the rise in living standards (growth of the middle class) in China has largely been due to the export of goods to foreign markets. This could change. I think we are going to see both de-globalization and an increasing preference to source products from other countries instead of China. If that's the case, then it's a question of whether or not China's internal market demand will be sufficient to boost its GDP.
This is extremely interesting. So, Confucian societies believe in collectivity and social harmony, so some cruel acts are acceptable if their purpose is the social good and well being. Sounds kinda machiavellian but also a bit reasonable. But nowadays the effects of urbanization mixed with the obsession with hard work and studying to death are making it impossible to reach replacement birth rate. Such a tragic outcome of circumstances. East Asians seem to be very intelligent and academically oriented but they also fail at balancing that with family life. Just the most blatant example of our failure as a civilization.
Well said, friend. Everything has a cost and their Confucian cultural roots may have given them advantages in many ways but also cost them deeply in many others.
name the acts
@@wade2bosh according to this dude forced abortions and infanticide. By the way, before the contact with the West these societies were very fond of death penalty, not in subtle ways. The Chinese tortures are worldwide infamous, like the thousand wounds torture or the five pains.
Well does confucianism not encourage people to have children though? I find that almost inconceivable since it evolved in an agrarian society where having lots of kids is a lifeline, I feel like its a western habit to blame every flaw of a non western country on its cultural roots and assign everything good in the same country as being caused by adopting western culture
@@adityarajan592 I didn't say that. Probably it isn't so clear but my claim involves that childlessness is a consequence of urbanization and obsession with working, which is in turn a consequence of the contact with the West. So I didn't imply that Confucianism is against having children, what happened is a tragic outcome of a weird mixture of cultural issues.
It's not just East Asia. Europe would also be in a population decline if it wasnt for immigration.
It's middle east and both Americas as well.
porn, feminism, consumerism, big cities, anything else?
you think people would rather whack it then be with a japanese wife?
I think about how manland China has a huge ban on feminism and porn, but doesn't get a high birth rate. Singapore and South Korea have porn bans, but those aren't effective. It shows me the cost of urbanization more than anything.
@@skylinefever yeah many variables, one no doubt being that China had a one child policy which probably became quite a hard thing to culturally shake off too
@@adhdave Indeed, there are many things happening at once, so just changing one thing won't create a baby boom. Also, I dread the idea of creating a baby boom only among people who are shitty parents to make line go up.
feminism is actually good
Is true that East Asians have low birthrates, but have all of you ever realized that if European countries, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand were 100% white and homogeneous, all of them would had started to lose population since 2008-2013? For example, the white dutch population peaked with 13 million 10 years ago and has been decreasing since then, the same for the white British and white American. The white French were around 54 million in the early 2000's anf nowadays is around 47-49 million.
If it wasnt for immigration everyone would be talking about these countries before talking about Japan, China and Korea's situation
That might be true to a certain extent, but the native Dutch birth rates are still significantly higher than the East Asian. No European ethnic group has fertility under 1 children per woman.
Anglosphere and some European countries can integrate immigrants really well, the same cannot be said for East Asia.
Thats not true look at the French riots
@@JC-ld2uo That's exactly why I said "some" European countries. I'd say France as a whole is doing quite well relative to other European countries honestly, perhaps due to the colonial-era influences.
@@TamagoSandolol😂
Great video! Please do one on India next. Their demographic transition is pretty cool😊
Thank you! I need to research India properly, the complexity of Indian demographics is mind-boggling :D
India would be a big project for sure...
Lmao india is also declining in population 😂😂😂
Industrial revolution and its consequences has been a disaster for the human race
go live in the woods.
Not only for the human race, for many other species too.
Comments on the Jolly Heretic Dutton channel convinced me to listen to the tedpill manifesto, because it was argued that industrialization causes Idiocracy.
Arcade assassin based
@@mithos789 non arcade assassin viewer. what a waste
The moment when half of the country lives in the metropolitan agglomeration of South Korea. 😮😮
The czech is speeding up.
The Czech is slowing down
the czech should _žit jako kaskader_
Czech yourself before you wrzech yourself.
@@rawlenyanzi6686 🤨
@@JoakimfromAnka It is a timeless rap verse, said by the great American poet, Ice Cube.
Wow, look at Tokyo going being an absolute IQ shredder. 1.08
Europeans have more high IQ humans
Have you seen Seoul and Hong Kong?🤣🤣🤣
Meanwhile Okinawa with 1.80
@@jostnamane3951 Interestingly enough the districts in Tokyo with the highest TFR are the richest districts (Minato-ku & Chiyoda-ku)
@@TamagoSando really? That's Interesting. But Why do you think Okinawa has a higher birth rate compared to the rest of Japan since it is comparatively poorer than other parts of the country?
The peoples of East Asia are very disciplined peoples even more than the peoples of Western Europe, and because in modern east asia work and production have become the most important thing that a person achieves in his life whether a man or a woman, so it is natural that having children or relationship is completely neglected by them
I think China's situation isn't nearly as bad as people think, economically. The fast pace of industrialization and productivity growth means that the cost of supporting their elders (who lived in much poorer country) is relatively low, compared to the wage of current workers. Of course long term it wouldn't suffice but this would increase the time for the problem to reach them, like immigration in the west. China, particularly, has a huge population of peasants, which won't have a huge negative economic effect as they age and retire.
China has the most automation per capita out of every country in the world and is developing ai
Poland is ethnostate and we desire for it to stay that way too.
@@ibz1431 I think the Austrian painter took care of Polands jews lol
Pis already considering importing 450,000 guest workers 😂
You will be told what to do by Washington and Brussels and be happy.
@@ibz1431 Not a lot of Jews in Poland today
Keep it that way, and increase your fertility
The most consistent trend seen everywhere is that fertility varies inversely with the participation rate of women in the workforce. When women buy into the idea of having a career, or when governments encourage women to work in lieu of having children, they delay having children, and often find that they have waited too long, and their participation in the labor force increases the supply of labor and thereby depresses wages, reducing the benefit of the second income. When women choose a home life raising children over careers, it frees them to raise the children, and also reduces the supply of labor, causing wages to rise and making it more likely that the husband can support the family.
Please do a liittle research. European birthrattes are on the best trajectory e.g.: Very gradual decline and only 0.3 (USA, France, UK) to 0.95 (Germany, Italy, Poland,Spain) below replacement. Some 3rd and developing world,E.g.: India, Brazil, Argeentin) have a catastrophically steep decline from 6-7(Only 35 years ago) for woman, to under 2.0. present day.
*1st world Asia = below 1.0
@@Rowlph8888 Correct! In India, Women Participation in economy has crashed from 35% in 2000 to 15% today. Yet our fertility rate kept declining. Infact, it crashed from about 4 children per woman to 2.
A few ideas to improve birth rate is 1. Study countries like Israel that has high birth rates despite being a wealthy country. Doesn't mean you copy them exactly but at least you'll get some ideas. 2. Focus on raising birth rates in the countryside and smaller cities where raising children is much cheaper and less pressure to get your kids into the best schools.
what does israel do different exactly? to be honest they really need to up their population because they almost went extinct in the 40s.
Saudi Arabia has better demographic data. One of the reasons is lack of equality between genders.
@@MarcinMezykShowSaudi Arabia exists because the US allows it to. The moment HS security support is withdrawn Iran will invade.
@@MarcinMezykShowSaudis have a fertility rate below 2 too
@@Kickboxer7267 they don’t, it’s 2.2-2.4
This channel gives me the vibe of Whatifalthist channel.
"proud warrior culture"
agreed, though the videos are not nearly a quarter of how jingoist and conservative whatifalthist is.
i will be expecting an antithesis to this channel sometime soon, in the meantime, grab the videos with a grain of salt
Definitely thought of Whatifalthist when the Peter Zeihan reference came up lol
why? @@arisaka233
communist @@maxcream6726
我是中国人，今年29岁，目前根本没有结婚的想法，除去房租和生活开支我每年可以存下1～1.5万美元，如果结婚生孩子的话我可能会负债30万美元
I’ve also considered the fact that if the demographic situation got bad enough in the future, that forced suicide would be put in place. I thought I was crazy for thinking it but now I know others have realized it is a possibility as well.
Good video overall but I disagree with the connection you make between low fertility rates and conservative approach to families in east Asian culture. You mentioned women's aspirations outside family life. In my opinion you can make that argument maybe for Japan or Korea but not for China. I lived in China for a while and none of the women had great career aspirations. That's mostly true for the guys too. High youth unemployment and a crackdown on private enterprises don't make for many interesting and fulfilling jobs.
There are several factors I observed that explain the low birth rates. The main thing resulting from traditional culture is the concept of "face". It's better to have no kid at all than to have a failure. Therefore, you need to invest a lot of time and resources for your child to succeed that puts a big strain on families, especially if both parents work and they also have to take care of four elderly grandparents.
Another factor is consumerism. Despite being an increasingly communist country, China is far more consumerist than the West. This means that people are not willing to sacrifice their lifestyle for children because it would mean that they would also lose status if they can no longer afford expensive status symbols.
The decline is further amplified by Asian cultures being even more online than Western cultures. I don't believe this to be a cause but it amplifies and speeds up any big cultural shift which in my opinion partly explains why the fertility collapse was so rapid in east Asia.
Lastly there are female male relations that have become increasingly hostile and problematic. One position I've heard is that women now both have to work while still having to fulfill the traditional expectations to care for children and therefore aren't willing to have them. I believe this is your position as well but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. However, I have personally observed something else. Let me give two examples: firstly I have a friend whose girlfriend has a very high paying job (easily top 1% in my country) while he is still a student. Yet, he's still expected to pay for absolutely everything (they are both east Asian immigrants). Secondly, I have seen many very wealthy Asian immigrant families where the husband works and the wife stays at home and they still wait a long time to have kids and have very few (probably due to the factors I mentioned above). I don't believe this position is no factor at all however, men face the exact same problem of still having to fulfill traditional expectations while also being expected to do things that aren't traditional. There are some more things that need clarification in my comment but I think this is getting too long so maybe I'll write more if someone actually reads this and wants to have a discussion.
Very good, yes I have come to similar conclusions. It’s not so much the shift from traditional to modern families that is the issue, but about being squeezed in between the two and trying to figure out how to get ahead. Children are expensive now. Standard of living is higher. Not a great recipe for having large families.
Thank you for this well-argued insight!
Very well said. The idea that "You should not give birth unless you are wealthy" is definitely deeply ingrained in East Asia nowadays, because being poor will cause you to be shamed by others.
Regarding gender relations, men are definitely expected to be the breadwinner, so it is a great point of shame for some men to "live off" of their wife/girlfriend's income (吃软饭). Coupled with high youth unemployment and overly high female expectations of their future partners (due to American media, culture, and the Internet), it is a certainly a recipe for a demographic disaster.
@@kaiserbauch9092 I really appreciate that you take the time to read such long comments! Keep up the good work!
Work culture is also a factor
Low birth rate is not East Asia's specific problem.
Europe is also low.
Because people live longer, keeping welfare and medical care need more money.
so governments raise more tax and public dues.
It makes young generation poorer.
Poor young people cant afford to have their family.
Very simple .
Middle east and south Asia as well as both Americas are already there or just a little behind.
That doesn't explain it.
Its over for ricecels
Lmaoo
Truly never began for ricecels
Passport bros will end up doing much of the reproduction.
I think you're missing the woods for the trees here. You can have a full time job and still be poor in Japan and China. People are priced out of raising a family. Same in China, Korea etc.
They are horridly overcrowded 1 acre per person like .1 acre per person of ariable land. Cutting the population in half is good for them...they get 2 acres per person...the more they lose the richer each individual potentially can be.
It’s my birthday, just turned 19. When I get back from work I’m going to lay in my recliner and watch this video! Always look forward to your uploads👍
Good video, I have to say that I absolutely loved how the tone was completely professional, and then out of nowhere "a shitstorm of contradicting policies" hahaha. Love it. For some reason it makes me so happy hearing foreigners use that word :)
Keep in mind that Chinese Statistics are beautified. Chinese birth rates are thus probably closer to those of its peers instead.
Urbanists: "Rapid urbanization is only good! MOVE TO THE CITIES NOW, PLEB."
People with brains: "I take it you've never looked at the correlation between birth rates and rapid urbanization."
Urbanization is cancer, urbanized populations are far more depressed anxious lonely and sociopathic than rural ones - from someone who lived in urban areas
That's just only 1 of the many disasters rapid urbanisation causes
It puts a huge strain on soceity it creates economic inballance between regions, it creates ghost towns and dead or dying regions such as the rust belt in the USA or the empty regions of spain, it correlates with a declining median wage, and causes enormous amounts of pollution.
ten small cities of 100k people damage the earth waaay less than a singular metropolis of a million. and no transportation needs do not decrease with a centralised population it only ever increases, a huge city needs a constant streem of resources that can no longer be sated by the depopulated countriside making the nation reliant on foreign imports polluting even more, and further devaluing the countriside's ecomic role. Wanton urbanisation is the single biggest cause of suffering in our time. and we will se an exodus within the century. Because the city of Rome already went trough this process in the exact same manner only with less technology.
They reached a population of over a million, but that population wasn't a healthy happy pool of manpower it was in fact a huge burden. The entire empire existed TO feed the plebs who were reliant on imported food given freely by the government and the upper class wich trough slavery (just as automation did to us) outcompeted the lower classes from their usual production jobs.
The blowback effect was an unstoppoble decline for hundreds of years, culminating in the medieval ages when the empire itself fell apart due to the strains, the entire population was unhappy starving or barely scraping by fed up and straight up unwilling to fight for or upkeep the Roman soceity at that point.
A city of a million shrank to a ruin inhabited by 10 thousand ignorant catholic clergymen.
That is not what urbanists say. What urbanists say can be summarized as this:
1. Remove the single family zoning in the suburbs, so that medium apartment buildings (3-4 storey) can be built IF there is demand for it. And there is.
2. To build more housing units to bring down rent and accomodate more people. Which would, ironically, allow many people to be able to afford children.
3. In most parts of the world, including even the US, it wouldn't be possible for EVERYONE to live in the suburbs. So encouraging suburban development (as opposed to non-interference) would just exacerbate property prices and cause these people to live in even worse conditions, thus defeating the purpose.
4. Point out that suburbs aren't able to pay for their infrastructure, like either rural or urban areas can. Rural areas receive less services (which makes it sustainable), while urban areas pay enough taxes. Suburb tries to have the best of all worlds.
5. Building suburbs often come at the expense of cutting forests, converting farmlands, etc.
Anyway, this is only a brief summary. I just don't see why this arouses so much pushback (especially from Americans) since it never tells you to turn villages into Kowloons.
@@itsmealex588 People have raised children in much worse conditions, such as cramped slums shared with other families. Regardless, that's not my point.
My point was that there are people who want to raise children even while living in apartments (can't believe you didn't notice that), but can't given that they don't own an apartment, or that the rent takes away half of their taxable income. More housing units and cheaper rents would benefit them and allow them to have children. As would laws that make it easier for women to receive childcare benefits while working, or a medical system that doesn't economically punish you for a pregnancy, etc.
Also, it's a ridiculous thought that children can't be raised in apartments. Do Israelis live in suburbs? Is housing density in Denmark and Sweden even comparable to that of the US, despite the 3 countries having similar birth rates? It's just that Americans have historically been land hungry. That was not a problem once but cracks are showing up now.
@@itsmealex588
The alternative is making housing a right and giving small apartments to the poor for free
The elephant in the room is that retirement was never meant to be a universal experience. When the US retirement age was set at 65 years in 1935, the life expectancy for men was 60, and women mostly didn't work. Now we live to 80 and still retire at 65 due to the social expectation, and the government is too embarassed to ask us to do something useful with our extended lifespan. In a country with an 80 year old president, it's not too much to ask normal people to work in their 70's. Now the olds are paying for themselves, taxes on young couples can go down and they can afford to have kids.
Some joked that the reason the USA has an obesity epidemic is to reduce the number of pensioners. If the obesity epidemic was fixed, social security would have to pay 10 years more pension to everyone.
Worth noting that the extreme pressures on young people, making it ever harder to succeed in a hyper-competitive country, with a rather minimal social safety net in South Korea, means that those people who do buck the trend and reproduce there (especially those having more than one child) have to be (1) naturally pro-natal, with a strong desire to have children, (2) have a high factor of personality (to manage complex social relationships and hierarchical culture, and resist shame), (3) be high positive affect (so they don't succumb to stress, depression, and suicide), (4) be physically healthy (to endure long working hours, cramped living conditions, and severe air pollution) and (4) be highly intelligent (to succeed in meritocratic education system with a strong focus on STEM for success and to earn enough money to afford exorbitant rents). Unlike in the West, in South Korea, fertility correlates positively with Socioeconomic Status.
I think South Korean society is extremely eugenic. Future generations will be healthy, psychologically strong and stable, and intelligent. Meanwhile the familial cultures and behaviours getting passed on will be those associated with religiosity, or at least a strong focus on family and children. Strong genes, strong memes. For this reason, South Korea will overcome the crisis of an ageing population - it will succeed in putting in place those measures (such as increased automation of health and social care) necessary to survive.
Meanwhile, its immigration policy is also eugenic - you need to pass a Korean language exam to get residency, and Korean is objectively extremely difficult, so it functions as an effective IQ test.
Also, the political and social pressure may be sufficient to force rapprochement with the North and some sort of economic unification (South Korean companies relocating North of the border to take advantage of younger and cheaper work force (as already happened in a special economic zone in the 2000s), North Korean migrants moving south to take positions in construction and potentially social care).
I would like to add most East Asian countries nowadays mostly see childbirth as an activity a couple should undertake only when they have enough money, otherwise being a poor child will cause you to be shamed by others and severely hinder your future prospects as social mobility is basically non-existent here.
@@TamagoSando Exactly - this further selects for people with the intelligence and personality required to earn sufficient money to support a family (and also for those able to keep a marriage going, because having children outside marriage is frowned upon).
@@TamagoSando However I would rather disagree about social mobility (at least in South Korea). If you're from a poor family, but very intelligent and hardworking, you will most likely get a good grade in your final high school exam (which is taken by everyone) - then you will get into a good university, which is your ticket to a high-paid career. Private tutoring can only take people so far - the exams mostly test maths skills and rote memorisation anyway.
@@edvenify Those are rare exceptions, most children from poor families simply lack the opportunities and resources to even follow that path in the first place. For those rare cases sure they can climb upwards in society, but generally speaking social mobility is very low.
In the past Married Chinese women were pretty much slaves for their husbands’ family. They had to live with husband’s parents, grandparents, even unmarried siblings, sometimes married siblings. The women had to have babies, do house work and take care of the elderly, and withstand abuses. Modern women definitely don’t want that kind of lifestyle anymore.
and i get that
It's really hard to take this kind of rhetoric seriously given the eagerness of both women and men to engage in it.
@@didles123it is not a rhetoric, it is mostly true. And also for most women marriage was the only option available
@@blugaledoh2669
The actual obligation here is for sons (particularly the eldest) to take care of their parents. This is true regardless of whether or not he marries. Men that don't take care of their families are considered deadbeats. Women aren't obligated to take care of their parents. It's not unusual that a Chinese family would send a daughter off to be educated while the son must stay behind to care for the family and work the fields.
Now when a woman does marry a man, she shares some of her husbands burdens. To completely omit the greater context here and to characterize taking care of ones family as slavery absolutely is a rhetorical trick.
@@didles123 No, I am actually aware of this. Daughters aren’t obligated to take care of their parents in old age, because they were expected to marry and take care of their husband family.
Since daughters were burdensome and would not take care of their parents in old age, it is not uncommon for daughters to be abandoned or aborted in preference for sons. As had happened during the One Child policy.
Any plans to revisit your favourite and home region: Eastern Europe?
Next video will be about Visegrad countries!
Great content.
Japan will likely survive for sure, unlike their neighbours.
East Asian countries have a great culture and society.
Immigration is not a solution if the aim is just to expand the population, don't just put random people from other countries but must put high-quality people who can help build the society not just the economy.
How will Japan survive? They're among the most xenophobic of all the East Asian countries.
At least when a foreigner marries a Chinese woman, the Chinese grandparents will simply claim the grandchildren as Chinese and ignore the non-Chinese part, whereas Japanese look to prevent that situation from happening altogether.
Or ostracize the 'hafu'.
Isn't that what Japan and S. Korea currently doing? The thing is that it could only work very well in English speaking countries like Singapore, Canada where they got internationalized language privilege to get influx of high level proffesional around the worlds, also the population in those countries were not even original settlers so they do not hold the importance of homogeneity for society unlike where they came from.
so you think restricting immigration is OK?
great, cause this country is so scared of foreign opinion…
you said it!
@@zoey5104 Westerners always say immigration is the solution to the East Asian demographic crisis, but they honestly have no idea about the cultural dynamics on the ground here in East Asia. Even second generation immigrants have difficulties being seen as a native by their own countrymen in East Asia.
It absolutely infuriates me to see Westerners say East Asian countries should take in immigration because it works in the Anglosphere countries that they come from. It is frankly very insensitive and ignorant to speak from such high grounds.
The solution served up to Westerners by our own magazines or video broadcasts are always moronic. It is a mixture of clueless incompetence and malice at the high level, and religious derangement to "heal" the world by reducing Europe at the middle and lower levels.
Can you do a demographic deep dive into the Islamic world?
In time, sure!
will collapse due to war
I lived in S. Korea periodically for six years between 1972 and 1990, and thereafter in Japan for four years. I became quite familiar with the cultures, more so than most of my fellow [US] Americans. At the beginning of the video I was concerned at the over emphasis on Buddhism and the omission of Confucianism. The last part of the video mostly made up for the omission, but still underplayed the effects of Confucianism in Korea. Japan is less Confucian, but Shintoism fills the gap.
It is true, as stated, that these East Asian cultures have always put the family above considerations of personal wants. This even trumps race preferences, which I have personal experience with. Both Koreans and Japanese believe in racial purity; the reactions of men and families to local girls being seen with, much less wanting to marry, American soldiers, is extremely negative. As a marriageable age white male, I frequently had a woman board a bus, train or plane and panic when finding me in the next seat. They would try to get another seat, then if they couldn't would try to leave as much space as possible between themselves and me. When I introduced myself in polite Korean or Japanese, they immediately relaxed, and usually took the opportunity to get a language lesson from 영어 교수님 the professor.
The two elements of Confucianism that were slighted are that a male heir is absolutely required for the continuation of the family, and the reverence for education, and obtaining a university education, transfers to the persons of the educators. Not just that, the prestige of the universities graduated from and teaching at also transfers to the person. So, having graduate degrees from two well-known [if second tier] American universities, and teaching at one of Korea's top 3 or 4 universities, gave me almost rockstar status. Given the bloodline prejudice, I was shocked to have a marriage broker show up at my university to offer me young Korean women as marriage prospects. Of course in addition to educational prestige, there was the Green Card that could get the entire family into the US.
The Japanese culture is different. Both countries have been significantly "westernized or Americanized," but to different degrees. It is more likely for a Japanese woman to seek out a foreign husband than a Korean woman of "good family" to do so, but the Japanese woman is usually, if not always, doing so for personal rather than family reasons, and is more likely to look favorably on a Canadian or European match.
In addition, the Japanese modified the necessity for a male heir by blood. A Japanese family with only daughters would make a match with another family's second or third son, who would marry the eldest daughter and be formally adopted as the family's son and heir.
Both countries share the prejudice against darker skin tones that many cultures have. The greater prejudice against non-white American military personnel was pretty obvious. So, as noticed in the video, immigration is not favorably looked upon, with exceptions. Immigration by the descendents of emigrants is sought, especially in Japan. In Korea there was a prejudice against Korean-Americans who didn't speak the language or retain the culture. Teaching mixed Asian classes in the US for several decades, I noticed a number Korean Japanese relationships sometimes leading to marriage. In Japan the population decline has especially affected the countrysides. Farmers have been known to import wives from the Philippines and other countries who are willing to live and work on farms and continue the family.
Sorry, this has become too long. I will be happy to answer questions.
Damn, the farmers are that desperate? Japan is fudged
Thank you
Blah blah white guy marriage good catch lol incel
I'm guessing the dislike of US servicemen is due to their low social prestige and bad reputation (for crime especially).
The farmer thing is interesting and sounds like a major problem, I know that Tokyo is the socially prestigious place to be and they have major problems with the sex industry as that is how many women have to fund living there.
I wonder what the solutions would be other than a campaign of national shame. Which is unlikely to happen given that western influence is starting to cause things to spiral.
@@vorynrosethorn903 The prejudice is more likely tied to education and income levels, which is also true of the reactions of Australian and British men to American service men associating with their women.
As mentioned, Koreans put the family's prospects well ahead of the individual's prospects. Having a mere daughter help the family by marrying a wealthy foreigner was therefore acceptable, if not the most desirable consequence.
but China already overtook USA in GDP (ppp)
its lacking behind in nominal GDP only because Beijing intentionally lowers yuan to usd conversion to make its exports more competitive
in reality, China overtook USA back in 2016
they can increase yuan price whenever they want and overtake USA in nominal GDP too, but that wouldn't be in their best interests as it would decrease profits from exports
No way you believe that they beat them, taking whatever the Chinese say as facts. They won't over take the US, they are just another Japan
@@eatinsomtin9984Nope, incorrect. China's economy won't be another Japan but you are pretty biased so I'll let this one slide lil bro.
@@J_X999 why won’t it be, enlighten me
@@J_X999 just Google "countries by GDP (ppp)" and see just by how much China today is bigger
My theory is that East Asia will go right wing Handmaids Tale. Change the culture, change the outcome...
6:20 Not "Meiji Dynasty" but Meiji Emperor. It's the same dynasty before and after.
Fantastic video 👍👍
Thank you!
Please Consider making a video on the Demographics of the Muslim World and interesting video btw
Thanks!
@@kaiserbauch9092 Btw, what happened to your Climate Change/Climate Apocalypticism video?
in europe we have very low birth rate :(
South Korea: Hold my kimchi
Hope it'll change
Allow the Amish to flourish in Europe
It's a difference in degree. 1.5 children per woman is painful. 0.8 children per woman is utterly terminal. Especially since European birth rate declines happened gradually.
That is true, but in comparison with East Asia, it is still much better.
24:59 If east asians have such high academic ability, how is it possible that almost all major scientific inventions during the atomic era came from western europe, and america and eastern europe, while some came from japan?
So my theory is that since the atomic era, east asians have suffered from a technological and scientific gap. Their economies popped off compared to other developing countries mainly because of technology transfer from western europe and america. For example, the high speed rail network in east asia, whose technology comes from germany and japan. Now, with western competition, east asians realized just how difficult it is to close that scientific gap that has been lagging since the atomic era. They have to now invest more in research and development, which is draining the society from hobbies and prioritizing families.
Atheism plays a part
no not really
@@jmgonzales7701 yes it absolutely does
@@trollgegael no
@@trollgegael Buddhism is an Atheist religion BTW.
@@jmgonzales7701That is sort of true in a way, Anywhere where Atheism is thriving the birth rates go low for some reason and Idk, Atheisms population also won’t be increasing much, A lot of western society become Atheists but the birth rates decrease and this is according to statistics not assumptions, I don’t know the reason though so I definitely would have to luck into that
All countries which adopted feminism face the same problem. Women which study till 25 and work, cannot be mothers. When they decide to have children, they have to give up any idea to have professional success despite of their university degrees. Men which don't earn enough, to maintain four persons, don't found a family, specially when 50 percent of all couples are divorced and the man remains with the costs but without family.
Feminism is not the prob- Europe has the leastt problem - It's much worse in Asia (no feminism) and trajectory of yearly birthrate over time is worse in south America And Most of Africa (no feminism) - It's a fertilisatioon decliine In humans globally
@@Rowlph8888 population in Europe is only increasing because of massive Immigration which destabilizes European societies. I see it every day. At the entrance of the main church of my home town stood heavy armed police at Christmas. Ten years before that was not necessary. I am absolutely sure, that will become a normal view in all big cities of western Europe in the next decades. But concerning fertilisation decline you are right. That is an additional reason. The first hints concerning fertilisation decline in the west I could read in the 80th. PS. Feminism is less influential in east asian societies ( South Corea), but it exists.
@@schurlbirkenbach1995 Oh, I agree with you that it's a problem(The joke that they call Feminism, In 21st-century), but I'm saying that people are missing that it's not the "MAIN" problem, which everyone seems to be missing, which is clearly, pollution, and toxic consumption since late 20th and early 21st-century in different parts of the world and which is affecting the fertility of humans everywhere, whicch is of far worse potential.
*Birthrates have followed a predictable transfer from Europe going below replacement levels in the mi mid 1970's (particularly Germany and Italy), and then through the1st world Asian countries In the early 1980's and now South America and effectively "the vast majority" of the developing and Third World are on a savagely Severe decline from what was 6-8 children per women before 15 years ago to 2-3 Children per woman Just last year - On current trajectory, these countries will be having Asian rates by next yearBut
*Of the developed world, only USA, France, UK, scandinavia, Israel and Australia have decent birthrates, which are salvageable with good immigration policy- And in Africa, for example, it's only Niger and Nigeria, and a few others - everyone else is plummeting.
Iran never adopted feminism and is facing the same issue.
@@Rowlph8888
Afghanistan fertility rate in 2001 (before American occupation) was 6.7 children per woman
In 2021 (American withdrawal) it was 4.1 due to the introduction of feminism (although to just Kabul and parts of Kandahar since NATO didn't have full control over Afghanistan during 20 years)
After Taliban banned women education and in just 2 years it's 4.5 now
As a Korean, this video was fascinating. It gave me lots to think about. Thank you.
If you look at the data worldwide, the lack of religiosity appears most highly correlated to high suicide rates and low birthrates. I think you could extend "religiosity" be understood as metaphysics and an alternatively to materialism.
Because a lot of things can be written off as "a divine plan." Including unplanned pregnancies.
In addition, the idea of being rewarded with Heaven will motivate people to make the best decisions possible.
And the idea of it's opposite is what dissuades people from doing bad stuff. Or being rude to people.
Also, you have a safe place to go to once every week. Where people won't act like a jerk to you.
That's the culture we had for hundreds of years. So, it's tough to find an adequate replacement for it.
Especially in cultures that keep pushing for Laissez-Faire ideas. It worked for a while 60 years ago. But now it's just morphed into something ugly. Because there's no control of the people who abuse it.
Lack of religiosity doesn't track that much for low birthrate. Some countries that are highly religiosity (or at least low non-religious %) have low birth rate as well.
It is possible that religiosity or some culture perk makes suicide rate higher because there is no stigma in killing one self. Religion may actually be a risk factor. It is very inconsistent factor. I'd say temperature is a much bigger factor.
Another factor is if the country is poor or rich. Another misconception. Poor developing nations can have low birthrate.
I wonder how many people are genuinely capable of religious belief. I wonder how many others just fake their belief out of a need to conform.
That doesn't matter, what does is that the social norms promoted by religion include large families, a positive attitude towards children and a hatred of contraceptives. At least within Christianity.
@@vorynrosethorn903 yes it does matter, have you ever seen kids that are resented by their parents. No matter how they hide it, it still comes out.
I think i have a demographic collapse obsession.
When i saw a the screenshot of peter zeihan, I laughed out loud!
Love all of your videos! Keep up the good work!
Asians are like elves, wise and long lived and have little children.
Except they are hyper-industrial, collectivistic and overworked.
I worry to hear who you’d say reminds you of the orcs bro 😅😳
elves are immortal, East Asians are just slightly smarter versions of us, have very low birth rate and only Japan and South Korea out of all Eastern Asian lives longer than the western european ones all other asian countries that are at a similar development as Europe live similar lifespans or even lower.
@@edjohnson8017 Russians.
@@edjohnson8017have to be those germans
Well, in Japan, I still hear success stories of some towns and cities (such as Nagareyama, Nagi, and Akashi) increasing fertility rates.
All of these are unheard of in China, South Korea, or Taiwan.
Listen to feminism and population would decrease
which is good. IF nature wants is deleted then we let nature do its thing
@@jmgonzales7701 except it's not nature
our time in this world is finite, wether it is our nature to populate or not . let nature takes its course, plus a lot of people are not controlled by nature. we can see it in the amount of people not wanting children. @@jostnamane3951
Great video! I thought before it's only because of their focus on success. Thank you for informations
Thank you!
If you think discrimination based on race is done in American top universities. You are wrong. They will just do it in a roundabout manner. The amount of Whites in universitites have been declining. But at the same time the amount of Jews have been increasing significantly. If African Americans would go Ivy league universities based on merit they would represent less than 1 percent of the student body.
jews are white lol. in America or in Europe a at least.
Great video. Small correction, it was anime. That is the reason.
Damn, how could I overlook that.
I am deeply interested in how this will affect North Korea
North Korea already has a sub replacement fertility. And despite what people may think, the government can't just mandate people to have children. You can not expect that from millions of people. The NK fertility will collapse to other East Asian levels. But it will be a lost worse since North Korea isn't even a developed country. It grew old before it grew rich. This will 100% result in the fall of Kim Dynasty.
TLDR: It will collapse.
Your work is incredibly well produced
Are you going to do one for the greater middle east area of the Muslim world overall? would love to see one for the region!
In Manchuria in China, the fertility rate = 0.6
Everyone kinda lived a bit of a lie that things can continue in perpetuity and the old ways of life with impossible struggles and leaving people to die in poverty would never return. Looks like we've all made the return of such things inevitable.
In the future, sure!
@kaiserbauch9092 well yeah, this is a bit more precise description of what the whole thing you're getting at means practically on the human level.
Not to doom pill too much, it's all predicated on trends continuing without interventions
Because Unhappy and society make them depressed
European countries had more time to adjust via natural selection but the process is still ongoing because it hasn't reversed yet. This will play out differently in East Asia as they are getting blasted full force with their populace's inability to breed in the modern era.
You vastly overestimate historical China's policies regarding demographics. They had no institutional plans to restrain population size, but rather their population size would hit a cap that would force China into civil war and they would kill enough people that it wouldn't be a problem for a while. The cycle of unification, decadence, degradation, shattering, and reunification is a well known area of study in Chinese history.
Besides, Malthus was simply wrong. The increase in food production isn't linear, not even close to it. He simply didn't have enough perspective to see the curve at such an early time. Agriculture is heavily dependent on technology and the pattern of food production plateauing only for some person or society to develop a new technology to overcome that gap is one we have seen regularly. From irrigation, to crop rotation, fertilization, to seed drills, to combustion driven tractors, to the GMO. Malthus was just wrong.
In the same way, I think a lot of the thinking around fertility is just wrong as well. Now, I could be way off the mark here, but I have sneaking suspicion that birth rates are going to get a little higher in the West over time. It isn't necessarily that people don't want families, but they very much don't want to have one early in their life anymore. I think we are going to see parents become more of a thing for people in the 30-40 year range, because bluntly, who has time for that before then?
7:55 Except we know the Malthusian Catastrophe is literally an ahistorical counterfactual, so something else had to cause it.
Not really. Most demographers work with it as with part of the equation, even though it if course cannot explain everything.
@@kaiserbauch9092 Don't get me wrong, I am not debating its use. But GIGO is in effect. Evidence shows the contrary and more and more analysts are dumping the idea. Because the more people you have the more the odds grow of individuals and their interactions making the resource curve go exponential and surpass the population curve. This model in fact is a better match for historical results. This is why every "carrying capacity" of the earth keeps being proven wrong.
Now if you wish to claim the east Asians operate on Malthusian assumptions, I will agree.
@@ChairmanKam Lets Add to that that there is mostly likely a non linear effect of population growth on economic development and that on average we have more resources with bigger populations.
Scientific Evidence:
Non Linear Studies:
Study 5
The non-linear effect of population growth and linear effect of age structure on per capita income: a threshold dynamic panel structural model
Abstract:
This paper investigates the non-linear effect of population growth and linear effects of age structure on per capita income, using the threshold dynamic structural panel (TDSP) and non-linear generalized method of moments (NGMM) Models. A data set from 81 countries (both developing and developed) covering a 50-year period is used. The results indicate that there is a non-linear relationship between population growth and per capita income. Population growth rate before the zero percent threshold has a significant and positive impact on per capita income, while no significant impact is found after the threshold. Therefore, the optimistic view can be adopted for developed countries where population growth rate is low. In contrast, the neutralist view is applicable in countries where population growth is relatively high.
Study 6
Demographic change and economic growth: An inverted-U shape relationship
Abstract
The cross-country regression and non-parametric kernel estimation using the panel data from OECD countries over the 1960-2000 periods show the inverted-U shape relationship between demographic changes and economic growth; growth rates initially increase and then decrease with population aging
Study 7
Nonlinear effects of population aging on economic growth
Abstract:
Using panel data for 142 countries for the period from 1960 to 2014, we assess the effects of population aging on economic growth. We find that population aging proxied by old-age population share (or old-age dependency ratio) negatively affects economic growth only when it reaches a certain high level and its negative effects grow stronger as population aging deepens. The nonlinear relationship between population aging and economic growth is associated with the historical nonlinear relationship between the shares of old and working-age population.
Population growth = Innovation
Study 8
POPULATION GROWTH AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE: ONE MILLION B.C. TO 1990
Abstract:
The nonrivalry of technology, as modeled in the endogenous growth literature, implies that high population spurs technological change. This paper constructs and empirically tests a model of long-run world population growth combining this implication with the Malthusian assumption that technology limits population. The
model predicts that over most of history, the growth rate of population will be proportional to its level. Empirical tests support this prediction and show that
historically, among societies with no possibility for technological contact, those withlarger initial populations have had faster technological change and population
growth.
Economic development and population growth: an inverted-U
shaped curve?
Abstract
There has been a large debate on the relations between demography and economic development.
Our paper discusses the possibility that there exists an inverted-U curve, similar in shape to Kuznets’s
curve, between the growth rate of population and the growth rate of the per-capita GDP. The crosscountry empirical analysis, carried out on over 90 countries in the period 1980-2010, seems to confirm the existence of this kind of curve. The main reasons behind this phenomenon are discussed. First, it is
difficult to sustain a high economic growth either with a low (lower than 0.5%) or high (higher than 2-
2.5%) growth rate of population. In the first case, an excessive ageing of population causes the wellknown negative consequences. In the second case,thepossibilities of large households of providing children with adequate nourishment, education and health are reduced. Moreover, without a perfect
capital market, it is difficult to promote new firms and innovation unless adequate personal or family resources are available
Studies Population growth and resources
Care to Wager Again? An Appraisal of Paul Ehrlich’s Counterbet Offer to Julian Simon, Part 1: Outcomes
Objective. This paper provides the first comprehensive assessment of the outcome of Paul Ehrlich and Stephen Schneider’s counteroffer (1995) to economist Julian Simon following Ehrlich’s loss in the famous Ehrlich-Simon wager on economic growth and the price of natural resources (1980- 1990). Methods. Literature review, data gathering and critical assessment of the indicators and proxies suggested or implied by Ehrlich and Schneider. Critical assessment of Simon’s reasons for rejecting the bet. Data gathering for his alternative indicators. Results. For indicators that can be measured satisfactorily, the balance of the outcomes favors the Ehrlich-Schneider claims for the
initial ten-year period. Extending the timeline and accounting for the measurement limitations or dubious relevance of many of their indicators, however, shifts the balance of the evidence towardsSimon perspective. Conclusion. Although the outcomes favour the Ehrlich-Schneider claims for the initial ten-year period, Ehrlich and Schneider.s indicators yielded mixed results in the long run. Simon’s preferred indicators of direct human welfare would yield largely favourable outcomes if the bet were extended into the present. Based on this, we claim that Simon’s optimistic perspective was once again largely validated.
Care to Wager Again? An Appraisal of Paul Ehrlich’s Counterbet Offer to Julian Simon, Part 2: Critical Analysis
Objective. This paper provides the first comprehensive assessment of the outcome of Paul Ehrlich’s and Stephen Schneider’s counteroffer (1995) to economist Julian Simon following Ehrlich’s loss in the famous Ehrlich-Simon wager on economic growth and the price of natural resources (1980- 1990). Our main conclusion in a previous article is that, for indicators that can be measured satisfactorily or can be inferred from proxies, the outcome favors Ehrlich-Schneider in the first decade
following their offer. This second article extends the timeline towards the present time period to examine the long-term trends of each indicator and proxy, and assesses the reasons invoked by Simon to refuse the bet. Methods. Literature review, data gathering, and critical assessment of the indicators and proxies suggested or implied by Ehrlich and Schneider. Critical assessment of Simon’s reasons for rejecting the bet. Data gathering for his alternative indicators. Results. For indicators
that can be measured directly, the balance of the outcomes favors the Ehrlich-Schneider claims for the initial ten-year period. Extending the timeline and accounting for the measurement limitations or dubious relevance of many of their indicators, however, shifts the balance of the evidencetowards Simon’s perspective. Conclusion. The fact that Ehrlich and Schneider’s own choice of indicators yielded mixed results in the long run, coupled with thefactthatSimon’s preferred indicators
of direct human welfare yielded largely favorable outcomes is, in our opinion, sufficient to claim
that Simon’s optimistic perspective was largely validated.
I Also Recommend Books on the issue
Books:
Superabundance: The Story of Population Growth, Innovation, and Human Flourishing on an Infinitely Bountiful Planet
For centuries, the ivory towers of academia have echoed this sentiment of multitudinous ends and limited means. In this supremely contrarian book, Tupy and Pooley overturn the tables in the temple of conventional thinking. They deploy rigorous and original data and analysis to proclaim a gospel of abundance. Economics―and ultimately, politics―will be enduringly transformed.” ―George Gilder, author of Life after Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy
Generations of people have been taught that population growth makes resources scarcer. In 2021, for example, one widely publicized report argued, “The world's rapidly growing population is consuming the planet's natural resources at an alarming rate . . . the world currently needs 1.6 Earths to satisfy the demand for natural resources . . . [a figure that] could rise to 2 planets by 2030.” But is that true?
After analyzing the prices of hundreds of commodities, goods, and services spanning two centuries, Marian Tupy and Gale Pooley found that resources became more abundant as the population grew. That was especially true when they looked at “time prices,” which represent the length of time that people must work to buy something.
To their surprise, the authors also found that resource abundance increased faster than the population―a relationship that they call “superabundance.” On average, every additional human being created more value than he or she consumed. This relationship between population growth and abundance is deeply counterintuitive, yet it is true.
Why? More people produce more ideas, which lead to more inventions. People then test those inventions in the marketplace to separate the useful from the useless. At the end of that process of discovery, people are left with innovations that overcome shortages, spur economic growth, and raise standards of living.
But large populations are not enough to sustain superabundance―just think of the poverty in China and India before their respective economic reforms. To innovate, people must be allowed to think, speak, publish, associate, and disagree. They must be allowed to save, invest, trade, and profit. In a word, they must be free.
Malthusian catastrophe was just a theoretical speculation based on the assumption of steady birth rate and inefficient agriculture (the discovery of the Haber process and chemical fertilizers made it unrealistic). Although it almost happened in some regions of the world when population growth started to stress the rate of production like in the horn of Africa, Poland at the beginning of XX century and in Bengala.
@@ChairmanKam I am not sure I quiet understand your point. If we look at a pre-industrial society, how exactly is population growth supposed to lead to higher agricultural output?
There is no such a thing "productive age" actually.
People continue working until the very last days.
We need protection of all humans life from moment of conception.
nah abort that shi
It's like they signed a faustian bargain. They developed way too fast, and what goes up must come down, equally fast.
That is an interesting thought!
Also their culture has been a lot slower to change than growth in economy and education levels
There was no "Meiji dynasty". There was Meiji period that was equivalent to the period when one particular emperor ruled. (This emperor is traditionally posthumously named emperor Meiji.)
I’ve still never seen a good video on this topic.
It would be interesting to see if there ll be a rise of a new traditional Version of asian civilisation in future replacing marxist idiology.
All right, thanks for that assurance!
That was really well done. Top notch.
Both East Asia and Europeans won’t exist in the near future.
I can only imagine how the future will look
To be honest it's much more realistic that east asians would go extinct before Europeans. Although it's dark for Europeans I feel like Europeans still have a chance to bounce back in the future. But for east asia, there is too much culture to change like working culture gender roles to have replacement fertility and east asians don't want change.
They would still exist
Who told you they weren't other Asians in the region?
Mongolia and Siberian Asians
Southeast Asians are still there.
probably worse since east asia and europe is the epitome of human civilization. Without them everything else will be bleak and stagnant.
east asians arent southeast asians. Mongolia and siberian asians don't contribute anything at all. @@cocaineminor4420
4:20 Well if thats the case, the same thing could be applied to the rest of the Asian countries you mentioned such as Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan etc. Each of these countries have a completely different situation from each other including culture, politics and society.
It's obvious bro= Pollution, GM foods + pesticides + Additives and preservatives + all other chemicals - even Africa and South America have recently gone from 6-8 Kids per woman (15 years ago) to 2-3, last year.the trajectory is catastrophic, and it's haappenin In all continents- Even immigration is going to dry up Soon, because even most the Africans are running out Of young People
can you make the next video about central asia?
It will be interesting to see because nearly all Central Asian countries are experiencing a rise in their birth rates. I think it has something to do with the resurgence of religion.
@@jostnamane3951 Yeah, we need more people.
We already have enough land as it is
@@FuntimeByzantium
Population is power. As a Turk, i want strong Turkic states. I also want Turkic people to migrate Turkey. If we are going to need new population, it must be other Turkic brothers/sisters.
Definitely might in the future!
The close family culture in East Asia is a "2 edge sword" for low birth rates. On the one hand, the family culture encourages people to get married and have children. On the other hand, there is no taboo for children to continue living with their parents after the children reach adulthood. Assuming good responsible children who goes to school and get a job, living with parents is cheap and safe. There is little incentive to take a chance to find love and build a family, especially for the women.
me patenitly watching a KaiserBauch video to see who he will offend :)
the libs.
I think I managed not to offend anyone too much with this one! It is a nice change :D
Have you looked into the video "The Housing Crisis is the Everything Crisis"?
Great video as always.
Thank you!
High birth rates were for a reason. Kids were advantage, not a disadvantage.
Something happened in the 1970-80-s. The current system is not compatible with human evolution. We simply cannot reproduce in a system like this, like the rest of the developed world. I like the term human resources because I think I also describes the problems. Humans can be considered a resource, and if used too much then its gets depleted.
We had the black plague in europe in the 14th century, killing atleast 1/3 of the population. Did you know what happened afterwards? The renaissance
There is a very crucial difference between plague and ageing. Plague will mostly kill the weaker, elderly and children, but it will left you with the prime-age population as the most robust age group. With ageing a sub-replacememt fertility, you will end with society with very high median age and very few young people.
@@kaiserbauch9092 the plague affected young adults the most of all, the age group that was most important of all during that age; www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3094018/#:~:text=At%20face%20value%2C%20these%20results,adults%20and%20very%20old%20adults. Result was an appreciation in human labour and start of the end for feudalism. There are some positive aspects too
@@kenpe1455 The plague effected what we consider "young adults" the most because a majority of the population would fall under that category. The average age back then was much, much younger than today. It disproportionately effected elderly and young children the most, that's pretty indisputable.
@@shadowyshadow6498 did you read the study I posted? Quote:"compared to normal medieval mortality, the Black Death disproportionately affected young adults and very old adults" so we're talking about a crucial part of the working age population.
@@kenpe1455 the study you posted does not contain this quote. What it does contain, though, is "The results of this study indicate that older adults faced higher risks of dying during the Black Death compared to younger individuals." which is the complete opposite of what you claim.
24:04 😅it honestly did go off the rails there. The subtitles you add when you make a small or large mispronunciation are indeed helpful or at the least mindful!
Italy, Spain, USA etc. are also below replacement level.
Good video
Thank you!