2 ms·

I think a lot of people expect the rise in working from home to fix this problem but it’s more than that. Rural areas need access to affordable broadband inter

I think a lot of people expect the rise in working from home to fix this problem but it’s more than that. Rural areas need access to affordable broadband internet, and more industries need to embrace remote work. I think an overall decline in population is good but the remaining population needs to be properly dispersed to see any real benefit from it. And that’s going to require intentional support and intervention from government.

Someone 6y ago
That would only move the problem of “there are too many houses” to cities or suburbs, not solve it. Also, I don’t think empty houses are the main problem. An older population costs more and pays less taxes. So, if one keeps current infrastructure spending, budget deficits will increase, and government debt will go up. And if the population shrinks, government debt per capita will go up even more. If their population really halves, I think many countries will have to make hard choices as to which villages or even cities, and roads leading into them, to abandon. I can’t find it now, but I remember some people arguing Japan should do that with Fukushima after the tsunami.
- asebold 6y ago
  Not at all. Cities are crowded af. With more of the population dispersed, we can redesign urban life with more living space, create more parks, support more robust urban farming, etc. Cities wouldn’t look the same as they do today, but I think that’s a good thing.