Japan records lowest number of births on record as population shrinks
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
1. Economic factors: The salary man is slowly going away and so are the institutions that revolve around him such as mainstream Japan's definition of a family.
2. The younger generation wants more freedom from a patriarchal society; in particular women. On a whole younger Japanese women are not content with being trapped as a housewife. (It doesn't help that women older than 25 are derogatorily referred to as 'Christmas cake', something past its due date of 12/25 that no one wants.) Younger males are also no longer content with being trapped as a corporate slave who lives mainly for his corporation and functions mainly as an ATM for his family that he rarely sees.
3. Xenophobia: Even though the younger generation is more tolerant, on a whole Japan is a racist country. For example, unless you have Japanese ancestry it is near impossible to get Japanese citizenship. This has larger consequences such as really low immigration numbers and generally, non-existent integration of immigrants into mainstream society (yes there are always exceptions depending on which part of Japan we are talking about). In Japan's defense most of Asia is also racist, but Japan just takes it to another level.
Also, in my travels, Koreans were about 1000x less welcoming to me than Japanese were. Koreans literally laughed in my face when I spoke anything in Korean to them. Japanese people would get a huge smile on their face when I spoke Japanese to them. Anecdotes and whatnot. :)
I can explain the reasons behind the different receptions you received. In Japan, caucasians of European descent are largely seen as an exotic novelty; you will be treated nicely on the surface, but you are not expected (or really allowed generally speaking) to fully integrate into Japanese society. You're just a tourist or English teacher on a temporary stay. Koreans don't have this view of caucasians (though I don't know anything about whether Korean society as a whole allows other ethnicities to integrate) also imo Korea is the equivalent of Italy in Asia
I thought only white people can be racist.
And a lot of Koreans get really excited when Westerners speak any Korean at all and will praise your Korean. What can be frustrating though is that they will often try to use English to speak to you even when you tried to use Korean, instead of using Korean as well. This can also seem rude/belittling but isn't really - often they're just excited to get to use English.
Hmm, my teacher's husband said my pronunciation was excellent. I downplayed the comment politely, and he said, "No, I'm serious. You have the best pronunciation of any of our students." I'm not really in a position to judge, though. I just copied the pronunciation/phrases/tone from men speaking in k-dramas I used when learning.
None of the Koreans I tried to talk to in SK could speak English, even the young people. Perhaps they were just too afraid to try? The stares/glares also felt very unwelcoming compared to Taiwan and Japan, too. It's the only time in my life I have actually felt unwelcome somewhere.
I live in Germany, and the Koreans I meet here (we have a decently-sized local ethnicity, a multi-story culture center (http://www.kulturkorea.org/de/) and a significant Korean expat community (http://berlinreport.com/)) are more likely to be attuned to and interested in dealing with Westerners, I guess. And any Korean acquaintances I've made online (IRC, Hello Talk, etc.) are in connection with language learning activities, so they're probably similar.
The pronunication theory is based on my own experiences learning the language though (I e.g. found distinguishing and correctly producing some of the tense consonants vs. the basic versions quite tricky initially) and from Koreans admitting that it can be really hard to understand Westerners trying to pronounce their language.
I think the above sort of hints at something though: If you're a Westerner curious about Asia, it's probably a good idea to try and make contact with natives who similarly have an appetite for relating to those foreign to them. No doubt there are Koreans not interested in dealing with Westerners; there are people like that everywhere. Doesn't mean you can't find your tribe somewhere in a 50 million people population, though. It's not like you like everyone back home either, probably. Gotta expect the same anywhere you go.
1. Wealth: despite long term economic malaise, Japan is still one of the richest countries. Rich people tend to have fewer children. Japan's GINI coefficient is also a lot lower compared to, say, the US, which means the wealth is spread around a lot more. That means that a comparatively greater proportion have a high log-wealth than in the US, and would thus be less inclined to have kids.
2. Lack of opportunity for moms: day care is expensive (no immigrants to do it) and in short supply. If you can't get into daycare, you basically have no choice but to stop working. A lot of women don't see this as being worth the sacrifice. Here is a recent Planet Money article on this: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/07/19/203372076/will-rob...
Similarly, a majority of respondents of the Japanese General Social Survey think that "in case the husband's income is sufficient, it is better for the wife not to work". But economic realities make such lifestyle choices difficult. For example, when asked what level of household income would be sufficient for them to consider getting married, a plurality of Japanese women cite a figure of around ¥500k net per month [1], which is around the limit of the top quartile of household incomes, and way above what unmarried men typically make on their own.
As for (3), I'm not particularly interested in debating whether "Japan is a racist country", but getting Japanese citizenship is far from being impossible. In fact, the rejection rate of formally submitted naturalization applications is about 1% (consistent over at least the past decade, see e.g. [2]).
[0]: http://www2.ttcn.ne.jp/honkawa/2410.html [1]: http://jgss.daishodai.ac.jp/english/research/monographs/jgss... [2]: http://www.turning-japanese.info/2012/05/10-years-of-natural...
1. Saving face is the most important thing in Japanese society. Based on history, Japan's government is not above molding things like survey results to fit their agendas like the preservation of Japan's nuclear family or hunting endangered whales and other fish
2. In psychology, we're aware that people don't necessarily do what they say. I would guess that this is even more true of Japanese society at large. I wouldn't be surprised if many respondents merely gave answers based on what they felt people expected. Japanese society is a polite society. It is less direct and less truthful when you compare it to other cultures.
Of course I could always be proven wrong.
500 years ago: "If I don't have children who will take care of me?". Today: "If I don't have children, public funding will take care of me." If this has any bit of truth to it, the reduced risk that such social programs create have a consequence on population levels. Not bad, not good. Just something to analyze.
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/10/22...
[1]http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/12/31/national/number-...
These sorts of demographic shifts provide some of the best investment opportunities of the 21st century. Japan offers one of the most extreme shifts that will be found, but there are numerous others around the globe.
This takes for granted that in year 2060 people will be old like they are today. That change in human biology won't happen.
One of the areas our company has worked is DNA(software) processing. You probably have heard about "mother cells" for a reason. Those things could do incredible things. They repair the body constantly(if you are young),when you lose them, you age.
Breakthroughs on this area wont probably happen in single years time. But over decades it is a different story.
This will create another problem for humanity(humanity has always solved problems by creating new [smaller]ones). But at the same time we will have fusion and ability to travel (cheaply)outside the earth by 2060.
While this is intuitive, it is largely incorrect. As our population has increased, we have become more efficient due to network effects. With a decreasing population, you'll experience a reduction in efficiency.
Also, at what point will you be satisfied? Ideally, with humanity extinct, we'll be using zero resources and won't be damaging the environment at all. That's the definition of misanthropy, isn't it?
The efficiencies that we've gained hasn't kept up with population growth. If it did, we wouldn't be having major issues with things like climate change, over fishing, or water shortages. Moreover, if you've read one of Bill Gates' more recent blog posts; gaining efficiencies doesn't lessen demand for resources.
http://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Making-the-Modern-World
> Also, at what point will you be satisfied? Ideally, with humanity extinct,
Please re-read the post that I replied to. I was just merely giving an answer to a question: "Why is a smaller population a good thing?" You're making too many assumptions with too little data.
Put another way, which problem would you rather have: desperately trying to keep 2000 inner city youth from dropping out of a school that is halfheartedly going through the "everyone should go to college" motions and not really teaching them anything relevant or helpful to their life track so that the majority can graduate into minimum wage service jobs at best or end up on welfare or in a gang at worst, or teaching 20 everything you know about web development or some other marketable trade that can lift them out of the vicious cycle?
I don't really know anything about Japan's education system beyond serafuku, but this is the way I see the world moving in the somewhat near future as manual labor and service jobs continue to fall to automation.
Young couples can't afford a single family dwelling within a reasonable distance of job centers. As a result they rent apartments and buy cats.
A declining population eventually forces the government to create a sustainable housing situation.
They're about the worst countries to compare in this fashion.
Canada is very in-efficient in the way land is used and Japan is extremely efficient.
Apparently one is.
If a country wanted to have a shrinking population, it would likely want a fertility rate of just below 2. Japan has 1.41 (!) and barely any immigration.
The solution to global population issues is making sure that poor countries with high fertility rate (4-7) are brought down to 2-2.5, something which is already happening very quickly. See e.g. Hans Rosling's famous talks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeXJnOE-1gw
The solution to the low fertility rate is likely hard to change short term (cultural), but comparing countries in europe for example, it seems likely that making children reforms such as subsidized day-care, free higher education etc. would help.
So, what you propose is basic "you third world guys should be shrinking, not growing".
On the other hand, this first world countries, not the populous third world ones, consume most of resources and fuck the environment more...
That said, I = P * A * T holds. Environmental impact is a function of population, per-capita affluence (resource consumption), and technology.
God forbid is people express a preference for renewal of population and births...