South Korea to give $490 allowance to reclusive youths to help them leave house

> Unironically get them partners

So how do you practically do that? Is there a state run harem for the young men you mention to get a partner? Maybe I just lack imagination but money to spend on outside activities seemed like an OK approach. What do you have in mind?

You also forgot that their women are unapologetically not interested in the average Korean man. Because of the insane requirements put on women who marry (take care of both sets of parents and husband), most are simply refusing to date or settle down.

Their nightclubs frequently ban foreigners, ostensibly due to "risk of crime or violence" but absolutely in practice because they know that foreigners do quite well, too well in most clubs.

You seem to be knowing a thing or two about this. Do you see movements among those men similar to what's happening in western societies with "incel" movements and the like, i.e. radicalization online?

I would reword the suggestion a bit.

"Give them a supportive social circle where making small failures are acceptable"

Agree but with a different solution: the focus on partners is unsustainable and doesn't address a lot of the deeper rooted issues that caused their lack of socialization. It also creates a codependency, which can result in an unhealthy relationship or really devastating outcomes when the relationship ends. It basically "fixes" the problem for society but leaves individuals incredibly vulnerable.

Ideally, you would instead focus on getting them to join communities and groups. Which can be challenging, and it's also something the average person should do more. This will give them a proper support system to then take next steps on finding partners, and likely have better results from those attempts when their support system is greater than 1.

Younger people recognize this importance of community, they're joining discords they're going to meetups, they're desperately trying to connect with others but without a systemic encouragement of these groups and communities most of them struggle - the convenience of "everything online and text-based" is just too great.

Additionally, by focusing on communities over partners, you also help the average person which iirc tends to have a small friend group of around 3 people, and not at all the varied support groups we need as humans. I reckon also these friends aren't all that profound, but rather a coworker you don't mind biking with, a neighbor who likes the same sports you do, etc. This is likely also why polarization is increasing, if you don't have communities to turn to and talk things out/solve problems together, it's very easy to just start believing the most extreme takes online.

> IMO as tech people we are partly to blame for this.

This was happening way before tech was taking off. This trend was already booming in the 1990s. Robert Putnam wrote his book about social capital decline before the year 2000 - way before the social media and tech explosion.

Tech is hardly the cause. Capitalism is to blame. Capitalism. Say it with me, capitalism. The further we atomize people - the more capitalism thrives. (No unions, no broader labor movements, etc.)

They don't really go into the terms of the allowance, but if use it or lose it encouraged some just to go to the movies and eat at a cafeteria a few times a week from now on, it would probably have a better effect for a lot less money than most of the attempts at social programs I have seen.

Whether it is used is probably also a helpful metric.

There are many accounts of people roughly defined as “NEET” having what's roughly defined as “relationships”. It doesn't change much, and doesn't automatically make life easier.

See, for example, this recent DIY audiovisual feast (with DIY machine translation that is good enough): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIh6HjUrm9Q

You can't simply "give them partners", because what's fueling many of the things that you described at the top is materialism, female hypergamy, cultural/social pressures, inbreeding/purity ideology (pure blood), xenophobia, etc...

Presenting a female partner won't take away her expectations (including expensive wedding fantasies and high class lifestyle), her family's expectations, expected social duties, etc...

And I will shed light on the elephant in the room, that many who have not lived in South Korea don't know about, but paying for sex is cheap and easy to find everywhere. Many such men would rather pay for sex, than be burdened with all the duties and expectations that a female partner would bring.

A significant percentage of South Korea's problem is their own xenophobia and Korean ethnic nationalism (pure blood ideology). Which goes to extremes, and is even bias against other Asians, who don't look Korean enough or are proven not to have Korean blood. Where with other countries, they can offset low birth rates, marriage partners, and their tax base with immigration, South Korea won't.

Consequently, until the mind set changes, South Korea is steadily heading towards massive population reduction. Until only a small number of the "purest" are left, and a significant number like it that way.

IMO this will lead to an increase in hikikomori. Wait for it.

I was a shut-in for a few years and lack of money is one of the biggest obstacles to get out of that situation. You want to take a welding class? You need money. You want to take an online class? You need money. Keeping friends and getting a partner without money is extremely hard as you need money to do most social things.

Despite that, I think a straight up cash allowance is the wrong approach. Only thing that helped me was getting a job so maybe some kind of jobs program would be better, in my opinion. It will help some people improve their lives so if a similar program were to be implemented where I live I wouldn't oppose but it will allow others to dig their roots even deeper into misery.

Immediately imagining another random person asking me “but what part of arabic are you from” even though I’m not middle eastern.

I love this idea in principle, but when our school ran something similar to connect grad students who didn't have the opportunity to socialize due to covid remote work, I got a feeling some of them just showed up for the free coffee (we did free coffee chats instead of meals) and just weren't that interested in the social aspect.

The result would be people eating their meals awkwardly in silence. That is, if you somehow manage to make them join that experiment.

The Human Library is a project much like what you are describing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Human_Library

In the same spirit as this we have a “donut buddy” system in slack that randomly pairs you with someone from another org. Some user entered topics are listed such as entertainment and cuisine to kickstart conversations. It’s been a great way to humanize things. I’d love to do this in person.

Minor expansion: The bot handles the calendar coordination, too. Meets are 30 minutes and finish with a screenshot posted to the channel and end of the year there's a collage that's created. I'm fond of the stats.

I can't imagine this going any other way than a program dominated by the mostly socially uncomfortable types of people, resulting in "going out out to eat" but going to a cafe and sitting separately and on their phone the whole time.

As a reclusive person I will tell you a big part of it is not having financial security and therefore not having social status or good health. I don't have the time or energy and it's uncomfortable telling people how your life is going. Your bank account really is your status to a large degree. Low status, health issues, no extra energy, I don't really want to be around other people anyway.

When I lived in Oxford, UK (as a broke student) one of the cheapest places to get dinner on my street was a restaurant with a few very long tables with benches on each side. It was usually pretty full, so you’d always meet interesting people if you were the kind of person to walk in there in the first place.

They didn’t pay you to do so though.

I haven’t found many places like this later in my life, which is too bad. I’m currently on the island of Réunion, which I understand used to have very similar setups, but not many are left. For all I know the one in Oxford doesn’t exist anymore; I last went there almost 2 decades ago.

Sometimes, I think there is a sort of social "pre-filter" that occurs that helps to keep people "safe" when meeting new people (e.g., go to a friend's party and someone is friends with someone). This isn't perfect, but over the years it's helped considerably. I totally wholeheartedly agree that meeting new people is a great thing.

But in practice, this could lead to quite a few people getting screwed over in some way shape or form by people with terrible agendas. :(

That on top of the $490 could work, but likely minimal results with the free meal/social outting alone for reclusive type.

Side thought tho, if the allowance was included, in addition to the free meal with a stranger, it could potentially increase birth rates, which would then benefit their economy.

Edit: Just saw it'd be for ages 9-24... thought it was for adults. Hopefully teen pregnancies would be avoided

I don't know about a meal, but a coffee would be good. But that is a small point. This would be kinda of cool. I have two small kids and I don't know if anyone else is like myself or my wife, but we don't really have friends anymore. All my connection with other adults is my wife, her family and co-workers. But co-workers are just work place connections. I wonder if other people with young kids would find this useful? I mean, my wife and I enjoy each other's company, but we don't really have any non-family and non-work connections. It would be nice to have a conversation with another adult that isn't about uncle jimbo's DUI he got last weekend or a work project.

I had a similar idea when I was in Vancouver - get people who would like a home-cooked meal to sit down for dinner with new immigrants looking to practice English. I mostly thought of students, but anyone could participate.

> Give people money to go and eat a meal with strangers.

Given the subject line of this discussion includes the word "South Korea", I suggest you ask Mr Google about mukbang.

What's to stop the money being spent on video games and red bull, basically reinforcing the problem?

isn't this what meetup.com was made for? Not sure if it still exists but socializing events with strangers was what it was all about.

To have any hope of getting people out of their bedroom you're going to have to remove all data connections. The endorphin release from a browser/app is enough to keep people satisfied being alone, you're going to have to remove that and get them to seek it elsewhere.

Yeaaaaah, until that stranger ends up being a total sketchbag.

As a woman, unless I'm meeting other women I'd never feel safe about this. Even so, it would be weird.

Could never be down for this, and I'm only half a recluse.

I will bring my smartphone just so I don’t have to talk with strangers

Not quite the same, but hostels give me a similar vibe. Sometimes I'll book a private room in a hostel even though it's more expensive than an entire Airbnb apartment. Makes it much easier to have things to do.

Living in a medium-sized city can easily provide this type of lifestyle if you want it.

The founder of WeWork was talking about creating this kind of housing- private bedrooms (and mainly bathrooms too), kitchen, living rooms shared. A monthly fee for frequent cleaning of public spaces, because voluntary efforts not so successful.

An issue would be maintaining the age segregation of a college. Single adults of all ages may want to move in.

Already a business:

https://www.podshare.com/

Rationalist group houses have somewhat replicated this in Berkeley.

Sufficiently affluent senior communities are pretty much private universities without the professors, and with larger rooms. Complete with frankly surprisingly good food that everybody complains about and more facilities than anybody actually uses.

>i'd like to see subsidies for people to start families

I remember seeing a proposal to that effect in Texas that was decried as "Handmaid's Tale" or something similarly trite

We really do need to incentivize families, or we'll end up like China and Russia with their impending demographic implosions.

Australia has had a ‘baby bonus’ for about 20 years now. It’s something like $2000 now, and is intended to subsidise the costs of child rearing, and bolster the country’s fertility rate.

It received some criticism when a small number of parents were reported to have bought flat screen TVs, but that was just a politicised attack on welfare recipients, who obviously don’t deserve our hard earned tax dollars, and should continue suffering in abject destitution.

It's going to happen. Societies around the world are going to start to realize that babies are the most valuable commodity for their continued survival, and parents will have to be incentivized well beyond the couple thousand dollars or so that is the norm today.

>lab hours - but you can actually get that if you really want it

Where, exactly, are you going to get wet lab experience without a degree

Korea already provides a subsidy of ~$230/month to families with infants in their first year.

https://www.npr.org/2023/03/19/1163341684/south-korea-fertil...

> i'd like to see subsidies for people to start families

Why?

If you are withdrawn enough, just going to buy groceries is a win.

They may need to save it. Don't underestimate the financial aspect of this.

I mean you had friends so you probably wouldn’t fall into this category.

I have to imagine there's some sort of requirement to continue receiving the allowance, otherwise isn't this just giving them $450 to spend on more anime figurines?

Funny.

When I was 17 I also spent most of my money on video games, but it actually helped me socialize a lot because pretty much none of us had internet.

The more I think about those problems, the more I see the internet as the big culprit.

Ain't both countries very big on male chauvinism? Makes sense that they want to leave more than the men.

People like to fantasize about “The Orient” when reading topics like those, but the problem is the same across the whole globalized society. We may ask why it became so pronounced in Asia, or we may have a realization that this is the actual future everyone's heading, but it's certainly not some “traditional” thing (unless, of course, there was a tradition like that I have no idea about).

I'm a South Korean woman living in US but I've been traveling to visit family more, and I have a great deal of opposite anecdotes. There is a huge "trad" blow up on tiktok and other social media in South Korea right now.

A lot of the western reporting on South Korea is highly highly skewed. It's a society that demands a lot from both women and men (for better or worse). For example, in America a lot more women get plastic surgery, however I know many more korean MEN than women that have plastic surgery.

Any sources to clarify this observation?

One reason I ask is because if one is just looking at the Korean-American population as a whole, there are a couple other factors that could be leading to the gender imbalance:

- Mothers raising their kids in U.S. while the father works in Korea

- Historic immigration after the Korean War, during which a large portion of the male population was wiped out

Just curious: why is your comment written like that? TTS?

William Gibson's /Idoru/ runs with this concept but, somewhat counterproductively in this context, as a virtual version of the old Kowloon Walled City "in" Hong Kong, where hikikomori socialize, strategize about shared goals, wheel and deal, etc.

Doesn't mean much though. A shut-in can usually handle occasionally leaving the house.

I wonder if they have to spend the money in person too.

It's all moot if they spend it all via ordering on the internet and paying cash on delivery.

Ouch!

490 a month? No it is not.

I don't know where you're doing your PhD but this absolutely not true.

It's a wonderful peak into how languages might have evolved in the past.

One day a bard is passing through some village or other and, having recently traveled to the far east, tells stories of the reclusive hikikomori of Japan. A young fella at the tavern hears the stories and is inspired to grow up to be a bard himself so he too can travel to the far east. But! He goes a little too far south and - mistaking the Yellow Sea for the Sea of Japan - swims across to the Korean peninsula bringing an invasive new word in his pocket.

Obviously they do as it is just as common in South Korea as Japan. I have never heard of the word hikikomoro before. It's definitely not in common English usage at all. Otaku is what I hear in Korea. Recluse is English.

Yes but also so much worse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeonse

From what I understand, hikkikomori usually live with their parents.

I am not surprised at a rural area where babies are rare.

The thing is opportunity is generally far greater in the cities. People who aren't failures will generally move to the cities, the rural areas have few people of an age to be reproducing.

I think it is just intended as an incentive here. Get the ball rolling and see what happens.

My favorite argument is the seatbelt argument. If car dealerships sold cars without seatbelts, but charged $1,000 to upgrade to included seatbelts - how many people would die due to it?

Your point (if we take this discussion in very very good faith and keep it theoretical) is similar - will people make the best choice for themselves, or is it better to have rules/requirements to push them towards decisions that will benefit them?

This is fairly reductive but isnt :

>Create a brotherhood organization, force every male who’s not gainfully employed to join that organization. If they don’t join they go to jail.

more or less mandatory military conscription that I believe South Korea in particular already has?

And what would this brotherhood organization even do? Just let people bully each others?

Funny enough this is close to what the Puritans did in New England. Just familyhood instead of brotherhood.

> Everyone was compelled by law to live in families. Town officials would search the town for single people and, if found, order them to join a family; if they refused, they were sent to jail.

(and the average family size at the time was a little over 9 children)

Why exactly should this law be limited to men? Put the women to work too, it would be sexist otherwise.

Communist countries did that. Except the brotherhood were state factories. If you refused to get a job (which you were guaranteed to get, as "full employment" was a core tenet of the system), you were sent to jail to wisen up.

>one would rather have them do team activities like sport or boy/girl/mixed scout

Plenty of developed countries where mixed team activities are the norm and the fertility rates aren't looking that much better once you filter first/second generation immigrants (including, many are already bordering on Japan's levels).

Having them do sports together until the age of 18 isn't going to solve the increasing cost of milestones, consumerism, increasing standards pushed by multimedia, crushing work cultures, pushing the norm to 30+, and more. Several of the aforementioned countries don't have half of these and still sit at 1.6 or less, while continuing to drop.