3 ms·
Replacement level fertility is by definition non-exponential (or if you prefer, has an exponent of 1.) A reasonable number of macroeconomists would be ok with
by mhneu 8y ago
Replacement level fertility is by definition non-exponential (or if you prefer, has an exponent of 1.) A reasonable number of macroeconomists would be ok with replacement-level fertility. The economics get really bad when the birth rate falls below replacement though - you get fewer workers supporting more retirees, which has the bad consequences you can see now in Japan.
- vkou 8y ago> you get fewer workers supporting more retirees, which has the bad consequences you can see now in Japan. With the productivity gains of the last few decades this shouldn't be a problem. That is, if those productivity gains actually went into something useful, instead of appreciating my 401K.
- tonyedgecombe 8y agoWhat are the bad consequences in Japan besides flat growth?
- ddebernardy 8y agoDidn't flat growth in Japan happen much earlier than this problem? My memory might not serve me well, but my own understanding is their flat growth is a hangover related to their debt bubble popping in the late 1980s - with the bad debt still getting purged out of the system nowadays.
- iandanforth 8y agoDo you know of any studies that look for opportunities in declining populations? There seems to be a tendency for people to label declining populations as 'bad' and proceed from there as opposed to asking 'what are the benefits as well as the harms of this trend?'