10 ms·

Japan is a living case study of degrowth: GDP has been essentially flat for the past 20 years. The scale below exaggerates small shifts, but it was $4968B in 2

Japan is a living case study of degrowth: GDP has been essentially flat for the past 20 years. The scale below exaggerates small shifts, but it was $4968B in 2000 and $4937B in 2020. https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/gdp https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/gdp On the ground, this has translated into flat or deflating prices (until very recently) and an increasing bifurcation of society into salarymen, with low but stable incomes anchored on jobs-almost-for-life, and part-timers on temporary contracts, with groups like single mothers living in poverty. Population is shrinking by close to 1M/year, the rural countryside is rapidly emptying out as young people flock into cities to chase opportunities, and the national pension scheme will sooner or later implode since it can't support 1 worker paying for 4 retirees forever. It's frankly depressing and there's no obvious way out.

plankers 4y ago
I'll probably be downvoted because this is stupid but I was wondering the other day whether Japan will be the first country to start factory breeding of humans, Brave New World style. If there was ever a candidate for it, Japan is certainly it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
elgenie 4y ago
Japan’s GDP per capita is similar to what it was in the mid-90s despite sizable per-worker productivity gains because their population is aging rapidly. However, “no obvious way out” is incorrect. Increasing immigration (with citizenship) and supporting women having long term careers (as opposed to jobs-until-kids) are both quite obvious; they just involve societal changes that are, for now, unpalatable.
- thematrixturtle 4y ago
  And they will remain unpalatable as long as pensioners currently benefiting from the status quo (generous pensions paid in full, cheap healthcare etc) retain an absolute voting majority, which they will continue to do for several decades. Immigration is slowly being forced open by economic need, but it's all very hush-hush (Vietnamese brought in as "trainees" to harvest lettuce below minimum wage etc) and intentionally offers no path to naturalization.
- patrick451 4y ago
  What you're describing is a ponzi scheme.
  - lokimedes 4y ago
    We see a similar effect in Europe, people live longer, and a large group is on pension, while retaining voting rights. This incentivize conservation of the status quo as we now have majority ownership of the societal future in the hands of a “rent-seeking owner class” that is not there to experience it. Controversial as it may be, I’m thinking that voting should somehow be coupled to taxable contribution to the society. Pensioners, children and other unemployed must be protected by laws instead of direct political influence.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      > Pensioners, children and other unemployed must be protected by laws instead of direct political influence. Of course then nothing stops those that have the vote because they work to disenfranchise those pensioners and other unemployed (the children will be theirs as well so are likely going to be protected). Laws are indirectly made by those who vote!
      - lokimedes 4y ago
        Indeed, but I see the self-interest element in our democratic systems, showing its nasty face, now we have demographics that are bisecting on what is in the socity's future interest.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        I don't see why/how disenfranchising a large chunk of people that have contributed to society would improve this. After all you'd be telling the people that are working hard to keep things afloat that if they succeed that they will lose the vote too unless they continue to work forever. The net effect will be that the social safety net and pension schemes will be ultimately cancelled because only those that work get to vote.
- nostromo 4y ago
  Increasing immigration is a dead end. Birth rates are declining almost everywhere.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
roflyear 4y ago
There is an obvious way out. Increase immigration. The US does this well. Why doesn't Japan? Because of racism and xenophobia. No one talks about it (wouldn't be surprised if I got downvoted for mentioning it) but Japan is mad racist. They do not like foreigners.
- amanaplanacanal 4y ago
  This would seem to be only a temporary local solution. Once world population stabilizes or starts shrinking, you can only increase population by exporting the problem to somebody else.
  - skyfaller 4y ago
    "Good news"! Due to the climate crisis, large sections of the globe are likely to become uninhabitable, so even if world population declines, there will be an influx of refugees into habitable locations. In other words, local population density could easily increase worldwide even if there are fewer people overall.
    - Fatnino 4y ago
      Or Japan could itself sink into the sea and skip the step of moving people into the newly depopulated islands.
- Ygg2 4y ago
  As another poster has noted, that's not a solution, that's just exporting problem to another country. What happens when due to immigration or rising standards the immigration tap runs dry?
  - roflyear 4y ago
    It's the only thing that works. Otherwise you have to change how you do everything. Much harder.
    - 4y ago
coldtea 4y ago
>this has translated into Is that a necessary result, or just a matter of how the economy was organized and money distributed? In other words, does politics and culture come into play in the result?
- krageon 4y ago
  These are moderately interesting questions, but without some actual insight (preferably informed) it just sounds like you're being contrarian for no reason.
  - ido 4y ago
    I think these are exceptionally interesting questions, and may suggest the solutions would include redistribution of the benefits of increased productivity from the capitalist class to society as a whole (a reversal of the trend we've seen since the 1970s in the "west").
  - coldtea 4y ago
    Contrarian to what? This is about social welfare and policy as opposed to "let the market sort it out".
fulafel 4y ago
Where does the 1 worker per 4 retirees come from?
- thematrixturtle 4y ago
  Sorry, that number was pulled out of my ass, but the collapse is happening: > In 1985, there were 7 working-age people for each dependent elderly person. By 2010, that number had dropped all the way to 2.8. Moreover, it is projected to fall even further: to 1.7 in 2035 and 1.3 in 2060. https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a01001/ https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a01001/
AstralStorm 4y ago
Thing is, GDP is a lousy measure of growth. Japan is undergoing a contraction and fossilization of its social structure. Interestingly enough, the same is happening slowly in USA and UK, and then after a big space everywhere else. Note the anti-immigration and austerity rhetoric, where what is needed is a major social change, considering of some attempts to level the playing field and prevent the current corporate and political aristocracies from emerging again. Aa for rural drain, it's been happening everywhere, mostly because for some reason we do not pay farmers enough, nor the systems we made allow even groups of then to be self sufficient.
- simonebrunozzi 4y ago
  US and UK hugely benefit from massive immigration. They are going to grow their population, contrary to what is going to happen in most of the western world. From 2016 to 2060, the US is expected to grow by ~80M people [0], even though a big chunk of that growth (45%) will be for people who are 65 or older. [0]: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p25-1144.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio...
- BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  The move to rural could be countered by spreading, modernizing and connecting smaller hubs. Companies don't want to spread, so people don't want to spread, so companies don't want to spread, repeat ad infinitum.
sph 4y ago
> an increasing bifurcation of society into salarymen, with low but stable incomes anchored on jobs-almost-for-life, and part-timers on temporary contracts, with groups like single mothers living in poverty Sounds like the rest of the Western world. We're not living in such a capitalist utopia over here either, are we? I think most of us on this forum are sheltered from how the rest of the developed world lives, with our 250k a year and private health insurance. Because from what I see here in Europe it's a temp worker world and single mothers living in almost poverty, with a welfare state close to bankruptcy. We don't have the jobs for life, in that you might be fired out of the blue, so I don't know which is worse in this case.

plankers 4y ago

I'll probably be downvoted because this is stupid but I was wondering the other day whether Japan will be the first country to start factory breeding of humans, Brave New World style. If there was ever a candidate for it, Japan is certainly it.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

elgenie 4y ago

Japan’s GDP per capita is similar to what it was in the mid-90s despite sizable per-worker productivity gains because their population is aging rapidly. However, “no obvious way out” is incorrect. Increasing immigration (with citizenship) and supporting women having long term careers (as opposed to jobs-until-kids) are both quite obvious; they just involve societal changes that are, for now, unpalatable.

thematrixturtle 4y ago
And they will remain unpalatable as long as pensioners currently benefiting from the status quo (generous pensions paid in full, cheap healthcare etc) retain an absolute voting majority, which they will continue to do for several decades. Immigration is slowly being forced open by economic need, but it's all very hush-hush (Vietnamese brought in as "trainees" to harvest lettuce below minimum wage etc) and intentionally offers no path to naturalization.
patrick451 4y ago
What you're describing is a ponzi scheme.
- lokimedes 4y ago
  We see a similar effect in Europe, people live longer, and a large group is on pension, while retaining voting rights. This incentivize conservation of the status quo as we now have majority ownership of the societal future in the hands of a “rent-seeking owner class” that is not there to experience it. Controversial as it may be, I’m thinking that voting should somehow be coupled to taxable contribution to the society. Pensioners, children and other unemployed must be protected by laws instead of direct political influence.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    > Pensioners, children and other unemployed must be protected by laws instead of direct political influence. Of course then nothing stops those that have the vote because they work to disenfranchise those pensioners and other unemployed (the children will be theirs as well so are likely going to be protected). Laws are indirectly made by those who vote!
    - lokimedes 4y ago
      Indeed, but I see the self-interest element in our democratic systems, showing its nasty face, now we have demographics that are bisecting on what is in the socity's future interest.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        I don't see why/how disenfranchising a large chunk of people that have contributed to society would improve this. After all you'd be telling the people that are working hard to keep things afloat that if they succeed that they will lose the vote too unless they continue to work forever. The net effect will be that the social safety net and pension schemes will be ultimately cancelled because only those that work get to vote.
nostromo 4y ago
Increasing immigration is a dead end. Birth rates are declining almost everywhere.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

roflyear 4y ago

There is an obvious way out. Increase immigration. The US does this well. Why doesn't Japan? Because of racism and xenophobia. No one talks about it (wouldn't be surprised if I got downvoted for mentioning it) but Japan is mad racist. They do not like foreigners.

amanaplanacanal 4y ago
This would seem to be only a temporary local solution. Once world population stabilizes or starts shrinking, you can only increase population by exporting the problem to somebody else.
- skyfaller 4y ago
  "Good news"! Due to the climate crisis, large sections of the globe are likely to become uninhabitable, so even if world population declines, there will be an influx of refugees into habitable locations. In other words, local population density could easily increase worldwide even if there are fewer people overall.
  - Fatnino 4y ago
    Or Japan could itself sink into the sea and skip the step of moving people into the newly depopulated islands.
Ygg2 4y ago
As another poster has noted, that's not a solution, that's just exporting problem to another country. What happens when due to immigration or rising standards the immigration tap runs dry?
- roflyear 4y ago
  It's the only thing that works. Otherwise you have to change how you do everything. Much harder.
  - 4y ago

coldtea 4y ago

>this has translated into Is that a necessary result, or just a matter of how the economy was organized and money distributed? In other words, does politics and culture come into play in the result?

krageon 4y ago
These are moderately interesting questions, but without some actual insight (preferably informed) it just sounds like you're being contrarian for no reason.
- ido 4y ago
  I think these are exceptionally interesting questions, and may suggest the solutions would include redistribution of the benefits of increased productivity from the capitalist class to society as a whole (a reversal of the trend we've seen since the 1970s in the "west").
- coldtea 4y ago
  Contrarian to what? This is about social welfare and policy as opposed to "let the market sort it out".

fulafel 4y ago

Where does the 1 worker per 4 retirees come from?

thematrixturtle 4y ago
Sorry, that number was pulled out of my ass, but the collapse is happening: > In 1985, there were 7 working-age people for each dependent elderly person. By 2010, that number had dropped all the way to 2.8. Moreover, it is projected to fall even further: to 1.7 in 2035 and 1.3 in 2060. https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a01001/ https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a01001/

AstralStorm 4y ago

Thing is, GDP is a lousy measure of growth. Japan is undergoing a contraction and fossilization of its social structure. Interestingly enough, the same is happening slowly in USA and UK, and then after a big space everywhere else. Note the anti-immigration and austerity rhetoric, where what is needed is a major social change, considering of some attempts to level the playing field and prevent the current corporate and political aristocracies from emerging again. Aa for rural drain, it's been happening everywhere, mostly because for some reason we do not pay farmers enough, nor the systems we made allow even groups of then to be self sufficient.

simonebrunozzi 4y ago
US and UK hugely benefit from massive immigration. They are going to grow their population, contrary to what is going to happen in most of the western world. From 2016 to 2060, the US is expected to grow by ~80M people [0], even though a big chunk of that growth (45%) will be for people who are 65 or older. [0]: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p25-1144.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio...
BlargMcLarg 4y ago
The move to rural could be countered by spreading, modernizing and connecting smaller hubs. Companies don't want to spread, so people don't want to spread, so companies don't want to spread, repeat ad infinitum.

sph 4y ago

> an increasing bifurcation of society into salarymen, with low but stable incomes anchored on jobs-almost-for-life, and part-timers on temporary contracts, with groups like single mothers living in poverty Sounds like the rest of the Western world. We're not living in such a capitalist utopia over here either, are we? I think most of us on this forum are sheltered from how the rest of the developed world lives, with our 250k a year and private health insurance. Because from what I see here in Europe it's a temp worker world and single mothers living in almost poverty, with a welfare state close to bankruptcy. We don't have the jobs for life, in that you might be fired out of the blue, so I don't know which is worse in this case.