That’s not replacing the native population, it’s replacing the births that never took place.
Imagine a Mexican child coming home from a visit to a white-majority, English-language town. Imagine them complaining about the feeling of otherness in their own country, and asking their parents why they allowed themselves to be replaced by the Anglos.
Imagine their parent bending over, looking that child in the eye, and saying: "ackshually, they didn't "replace" us, chico. They merely replaced births that never took place."
The technological advances / robots will outpace the need for immigration, and has for the last decades too.
Its just profitable for the capital as immigrants are a source of cheap labor which can be used to surpress wages.
Not sure about Japan, but anybody who thinks Korea is doing "just fine" has not been following Korean news. Daycares are closing left and right because there aren't enough kids. Now it's moving up to secondary schools. Soon it will be cafes and restaurants as there aren't enough customers. Then the whole economy will crumble down.
Technology doesn't help when there aren't enough people buying your product and services.
If your expectation is that everything has to stay the same: then yes, alarm bells should be going of. For 40+ years already considering pollution, climate change etc.
But labor has gotten less important with every step since the industrial revolution, objectively speaking the shrinking nations will have a lot less issues medium/long term then the ones "restocking" via immigration
Citation needed. If they were doing "just fine", then this wouldn't have happened (from TFA):
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters that it's "a critical situation.” The next six years, until the 2030s, will be “the last chance for us to possibly reverse the trend,” he said.
> The technological advances / robots will outpace the need for immigration
I will believe it when I see it. Or to refer to GP's point - where is the robot that will change bed pan?
It won't, which is why the actual issue mostly fails to realize as projected.
That’s the core disagreement. It’s like when a car is driving with 200mph toward a brick wall and you say “I don’t understand why they panic, the car will stop doing that before hitting the wall”.
Sure, that’s a possibility. But I understand projecting a current trajectory in trying to prepare for the future.
I disagree, it's more like you're in a tank and have been running over every obstacle in the way, with someone on the side constantly shouting "new next one is going to destroy your tank". It's obviously possible, but considering how little we're already valuing labor and have been in a phase of adding even more entirely pointless jobs because the labor is cheap and available - I honestly do believe that I'd be a very healthy thing for our societies to downsize (numerically) again. At least to pre world war 1 levels.
It's obviously not going to be easy, but this whole system is going to go bust anyway once the millennials get too old to work, immigration at best postpones this issue for a few years while introducing a shitton of new ones to the equation.
There is no perfect solution, but immigration is one of the worst for this particular problem
The asteroid impact 60M years ago could be compared but there wasn’t any society at the time.
What past “obstacle” has humanity overcome would compare to what’s coming in your view?
The distain you people have for culture would make a Conoco executive blush.
Japan's population pyramid in 1980: https://www.populationpyramid.net/japan/1980/
In 2024: https://www.populationpyramid.net/japan/2022/
When the ratio of "workers" / "dependents" shrink dramatically as those 2 graphs attest, we cannot have "prudent" updates. There will either be "painful" updates, or need to sacrifice something else (like getting immigrants).
BTW, needing more workers doesn't necessitate immigration--it necessitates more workers. Why do you guys always jump straight to permanent immigration? What's wrong with a temporary work visa?