S Korea - more deaths than births in 2020..environmental lifeline?

StriderX · 4 Jan 2021 at 17:33

Dis86 said:
No we don't. We need to change the current unsustainable model.

I agree, but the powers that be (mix of hubris, incompetence and malice tbf) have decided that's not in their interest.

Dis86 · 4 Jan 2021 at 17:39

cheesyboy said:
No we're not

Sure we're not. That's why the environment is doing fantastically...oh, wait...that's why there's a surplus of housing...oh, wait...that's why there's a record boom in species survival rates...oh, wait...that's why...want me to go on?

cheesyboy · 4 Jan 2021 at 18:32

Dis86 said:
Sure we're not. That's why the environment is doing fantastically...oh, wait...that's why there's a surplus of housing...oh, wait...that's why there's a record boom in species survival rates...oh, wait...that's why...want me to go on?

We were talking about the UK. Try to keep track.

Speaking on migration, as you were, is utterly irrelevant if you're talking about the whole world. Because it doesn't matter where they have babies, does it!

Dis86 · 4 Jan 2021 at 18:33

cheesyboy said:
We were talking about the UK. Try to keep track.

Speaking on migration, as you were, is utterly irrelevant if you're talking about the whole world. Because it doesn't matter where they have babies, does it!

How are those statements not applicable to the UK?

FoxEye · 4 Jan 2021 at 18:56

cheesyboy said:
No we're not

We don't need more people. The planet doesn't need more of us.

We don't want to reach the point where there's no room for any life except human life.

We don't need to keep growing and growing like a plague, just because we can't face the idea of contracting economies or pension deficits.

If population growth is the *only* solution, then quite clearly it is *not* a solution, because population growth is ultimately capped by available land and resources.

How about we look to an alternative sooner rather than later, and preserve the last few remaining unspoilt areas.

Smokey Deza · 4 Jan 2021 at 19:02

mmj_uk said:
I think Poland and maybe Hungary have a pro-family/marriage policy and their government give incentives for people to get married and have kids but they're in the EU's bad books due to preferring that over mass immigration.

They get married far too early. When they come over here the wives talk like their xx years of marriage is like some badge of honour, but given their behaviour they are quite clearly bored to tears with it.

Angilion · 5 Jan 2021 at 14:35

Dis86 said:
No we don't. We need to change the current unsustainable model.

Absolutely. An economic model requiring continuous population growth is obviously unsustainable in itself, but what we have is even worse as it requires continuous population growth as a proportion of existing population, i.e. the increase has to keep increasing too. That will end. The only question is the way in which it will end and most options are very bad.

Blackjack Davy · 5 Jan 2021 at 15:29

413x said:
For the first time every for S Korea there were more deaths than births. This is not a covid thing.

It seems.
- house prices/cost of living
- work life stress/culture
- woman's rights

Have tipped S Korea into population decline

This trend is happening across the 'developed' world.
S Korea are paying people to have kids, but it's obviously not enough.

The case study says she wanted a famil , but due to the reasons above is priced out.

Obviously this has environmental benefits - massive ones
At the expense of economic stability.

Or is this happening at the right time , naturally, as automation begins to take jobs ?

The government are concerned but it is this actually an inevitable natural and needed trend ?

To me it seems natural for the system we have. Without a reset costs are spiralling. There's a ever increasing cost of end of life/retirement support.
More people have less assets (home ownership is declining)
This taxes will need to increase

Kids are expensive,

Anyone here not having kids due to cost who want them?

BBC News - Alarm as South Korea sees more deaths than births https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-55526450

Declining birthrate is nothing new Japan is the same apparently and its same in the western world in general I think Germany has or had the same issue. The solution outside of asia is controlled immigration (or in the case of this country mass immigration with basically no control at all). Japan apparently has a fear of breaking its remarkably homogeneous population/values/culture.

BDEE said:
It is a good thing - Hopefully China and India will follow suit soon....

I don't see declining population as an issue economically - Unless you have a zero unemployment rate then there is slack in the population which doesn't have a net positive economic contribution. Plus the existing wealth doesn't disappear - Money is passed on and if those it is being passed onto a fewer then this is an advantage to that generation - The only issue I would see economically in that situation is that if it were a sharp sudden decline, then inflation could sky rocket, but it is very unlikely that would be the situation - More likely to be gradual.

Birth rates need to come down to secure the future of the planet - End of.

Different values in those countries in poor agricultural economies they're an asset traditionally more children means more labour/wealth/care in old age but in rich industrialised societies children are costly and a drain on immediate resources/finances so the birthrate is lower.