Geeter Mckluskie comments

Once again, the problem is the lack of people producing, so reducing the people even more solves absolutely nothing

The increased glut of those not producing is the problem

And the solution you proposed in your original comment is to have 28 less jobs for the people,

Wrong. The issue is *there will be 50% fewer jobs**

Here, let me try it in crayon for you.

There is currently 60% of the population that is between the ages of 15-65 in Japan, with 30% of the population over the age of 65. So, let's say there are 60 people and 58 jobs (Japan's current unemployment rate is 2.5%. The people working those 58 jobs have to pay into the coffers to support the 2 people that aren't working along with the 30 who no longer work. Let's get more people so we can support those 32! Great idea...until 10 to 20 years pass, then only 30 people will be working and they'll have to pay for not only the 35 elderly (their number will increase) but the glut of unemployable people you've added through immigration to solve your current issue. So now you've doubled the strain on the public coffers! Well Done! Limiting UBI for the elderly alone would be one solution that would have less of an economic impact than importing labour that would only become obsolete then end up being a double burden on the public coffers.

People are countable. Therefore, it's *fewer people, not "less people".

You're welcome

the projected reduction IS the problem

The projected reduction IS the SOLUTION

Fewer people for the 50% fewer jobs that will be available within the next 10 to 20 years. Not more people for fewer jobs, that would only mean more unemployed. So you'd be creating an additional problem by trying to solve a current one. That is you would not only have the elderly who no longer work... but the unemployed whose jobs have become obsolete.

Good. One less card to carry

If kindness toward animals reflects a society's values

If that society is Hindu perhaps. Most societies either hunt or raise animals for slaughter to be eaten. Those societies value protein.

You were challenged with the absolute lack of any actual expert saying this is feasible or even possible without serious consequences,

And you were challenged with coming up with a viable solution for 50% of current jobs becoming obsolete within the next 10 to 20 years that doesn't rely on unsustainable population growth.

There was a study done on the dingo population of Fraser Island. When the population exeeded it's ability to sustain itself on what prey was available on the island, the dingoes began killing themselves...until their number balanced out to a sustainable level that matched the resources on the island. This happened instintively. The same thing is occurring with the Japanese population. It's instinctively and naturally levelling out to a more sustainable level. There is an economic levelling out of the world order due to globalisation. The US, Germany and Japan once dominated the world market, but with globalisation that market is being shared by more and more players. Japan is also an island nation surrounded by hostile neighbors and is only 35% self-suficient in terms of food sustianability. If Japan's shipping lanes were to be cut off in a geo-political confict involving any of those neighbors it would experience famine within weeks. What''s needed is not a bloated unsustainable population, but a focus on agriculture and food sustainability as well as a new economic model that doesn't rely on unsustainable population growth.

There is no "fewer people now" only fewer people working now.

Japan's population in 2010: 128,185,275

Japan's population in 2024: 123,753,041

Japan's projected population by 2035: 112–116.6 million

One of them is not the President-elect.

Who gets charged is largely a matter of who is in charge

Sure, he may as well, it's not like Trump wouldn't have done the same thing so his supporters can just unbunch their panties.

I'm sure he would have. Not so sure anyone has their panties in a bunch over a father coming to the rescue of his son though. I applaud Biden for this. Good for him!

Not a fan of the Dems, but as a father I approve of this move

Narratives remain intact.

What has Putin done under the Biden Administration?

since population reduction balances

Yes! The population naturally balances out to a sustainable number. This is what is currently occurring in Japan. The government is being short-sighted clamoring for a population increase. Likely because they only focus on the short term issue of needing more money now. More money for fewer services needed besides supporting the elderly is not needed. What they “need” is more money for lavish drinking parties and government programs from which to siphon their grift windfalls. The pension program could easily be supported by UBI propped up by printing money which would have little effect on inflation while supporting the economy by having more elderly with expendable income with which to stimulate the businesses they use. What’s not needed is an increase in unemployment greater than what will already have occurred due to AI and mass automation. Importing unemployment is not a prudent solution to the current demographic issue as it would only multiply the number of people in need of government assistance.

A 50% reduction in jobs means 50% of the labour force will no longer be needed. If that 50% were to be imported then Japan would be importing a huge burden in unemployment insurance costs which wouldn’t be very prudent

in no way justifies thinking that less people being able to work right now can mean an advantage for the crisis

*fewer people now means having fewer people on the dole in the near future. Having more people on the dole together with the elderly population which no longer works exacerbates the problem of the strain on the public coffers

 I suggest you visit the place where your water comes from

I'm not concerned enough to make the effort

Which in no way does anything to solve the problem that fewer people working means insufficient funds available for those that retire. The problem was never that there would be too many jobs for too few people but that there will be too few workers to keep the system afloat.

The "system" being that which currently supports 125 million people. Fewer people means fewer services, fewer schools, fewer hospitals needed. Short-sighted, short term solutions create long term problems, such as importing labour that will soon become unnecessary then as such will be a further burden on the public coffers. Japan can print money to offer the elderly UBI to sustain them without having a drastic effect on inflation. There are solutions besides importing labour which will soon become obsolete and therefore double the strain on the public coffers.

Your point is that making the problem much worse

No, my point is that an increase in immigration for the purpose of supporting "the system" will end up costing "the system" dearly within the next 10-20 years when those jobs (meant to support "the system") become obsolete and those workers would then be added to the elderly who require support from "the system"

That would be a short-sighted "solution" that would exacerbate the problem of not having enough money in "the system" as you would increase the number of those taking from "the system" rather than contributing to it.

We order our water. It's supposed to be natural spring water, however, I'm not confident it's not tap water

And therefore you have disproved your own claim

How so? My claim is fewer people will be required when 50% of current jobs will have been made obsolete within the next 10 to 20 years. More people would result in more people collecting unemployment insurance which would only put more strain on the public coffers. You’d have the elderly…AND the increased number of unemployed to support. THAT would exacerbate the issue of the government not having enough funds to support public safety net programs such as welfare, unemployment insurance and pensions. How exactly does having more and more people taking from the public coffers support the public coffers?

For this, of course, becomes absolutely necessary to objectively define what is a baby

An ultrasound reveals that a baby responds to voices with facial expressions in the third trimester.

https://nypost.com/video/unborn-baby-smiles-at-dads-voice/

Babies rights Trump a woman’s right to kill them

Cut the cord and move on, guy

How does it less working people solve the problem of having a higher and higher percentage of the population no longer economically active and dependent of the work of a segment of the population 

How does having even more unemployed people not exacerbate the issue of having to pay for the segment of the population that is no longer working?

It means we can stop all the Chicken-Little mewling about population decline

Fighto...never mind. Looks like reading is not so simple for some...like me.

No offence, but googling is not super difficult.

Your source shows men, not women as having the largest number of murder victims. Apparently, googling is not difficult, but reading a simple graph is.

"If there were no law, I would kill you,” 

There is a law, so that’s not a threat.

Hamas mainly targeted the occupation force.

A music festival full of young peace loving hippies and kibbutz where new-age, yoga, peace loving people lived were the optimal targets then.

Most English speakers in Japan have a B1 (intermediate) level.

This, too was from the article @ rainyday

*Less than 2% of English speakers in Japan are thought to speak English with a high degree of fluency*

If a "high degree of fluency" is the bar then less than 1% of English speaking Canadians can speak French. If we're going to make comparisons then lets do so with apples and apples. Also, what is "thought to speak English with a high degree of fluency" mean? Though by whom? I've taught in a high school of 1500 students for more than 30 years. I would say that % is closer to 5 than it is 2. Also, a high degree of fluency is a high bar for a language that isn't used in 99% of Japanese' daily lives.