This problem is not isolated to Japan. Countries all across the world are facing the same issue and have been for a number of years.
Create a shitty, miserable, society with no rights or support, and people do not want to bring children into it… who’d guess?
The flannel has been wrung dry to the detriment of the working class; there is no where to go, no more water to squeeze from them. This is global society / capitalism falling apart.
Even if they did want children, without the support systems, it may not be feasible for them to have kids. Having them might mean choosing to starve or go without a house.
Even if you’re in a country with a public health care system, a sick/young child means having to take time off work to care for them.
Capitalism is the best we’ve got. Even North Korea has acknowledged this. With other systems people starve en masse. My hope is that we get over the taboo of regulation. Capitalism fucks up real-estate and wealth distribution. And health-care should 100% be government funded.
Seems super likely that capitalism is going to be a major factor in our extinction. Maybe we could have a bit less of it and actually survive as a species
I actually agree with this. Capitalism presumes infinite resources.
The major shareholders have voted down your proposal.
It seems like you already understand some of the limitations of capitalism. Look into why regulation has gradually been rolled back in the US since the 70s. Why did politicians start to agree with corporate execs demands for lower regulation. Keywords to look up - regulatory capture.
On a separate point, there’s plenty of famines that have occurred in capitalist economies due to capitalist exploitation - that is make more money, at the cost of of creating a famine. Some estimates put the deaths due to famines under capitalism higher than those under socialism. I used to simply know only of the famines under socialism and not know of the famines under capitalism.
Finally the capitalism we live in since the Great Depression is significantly different than the capitalism before it. Socialists, actual Marxists in western counties, yes the US included, were actively involved in the policies that created the welfare states across the west along with the regulatory regime. Some of FDR’s economic advisors were Marxian economists.
That was the compromise to save capitalism from imminent worker revolution. The unregulated, no-safety-net version of the system had lead to the conditions for such revolution. The socialist policies that averted the revolution in have slowly been dismantled over time and the system is reverting to the pre-Great Depression state. Faster in some countries than others.
If you want to reform capitalism to the point where it can no longer revert to economic liberalism (free market fundamentalism), you’d have to almost completely eliminate wealth accumulation. You could only do that by changing the ownership of the means of production. E.g. all employees in all corporations become equal owners (or controllers) of the machines and therefore the decisions on sharing the wealth those machines produce, instead of those decisions being made by a tiny number of major shareholders. You’d also have to significantly expand the industries operated by the government. At that point you end up with socialism. And yes socialism doesn’t mean central planning and no markets. Capitalism doesn’t mean no central planning and just markets. We do plenty of central planning in capitalist economies across governments and large corporations.
I’m not asking you to change your mind today. Just pointing out a few things to look into in case you haven’t.
Exactly its not some mysterious problem no matter how much the government and media try to frame it as one, people of the age to have kids have no time for kids and no money for kids so no wonder they have no desire for kids.
Countries all across the world
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_fertility_rate
Isn’t it interesting that the more “developed” countries have the lowest birth rates.
It’s what follows education. It’s the largely uneducated areas of the world that still raw dog like there’s no tomorrow.
So apparently under Sharia law, Muslim men can have anal sex with a girl under 8, and vaginal with a girl over 8.
And Muslims can openly lie about what is and isn’t true under Sharia law???
No, Muslims cannot openly lie about what is and isn’t true under sharia law. Islamic jurisprudence is a thing. It’s pretty important to Muslims to know what they can or can’t do.
There are different traditions (remember - there are Sunnis and Shias as the largest groups, some more obscure splinters, and splinters off of Sunni and Shia). Not everyone accepts the same Hadith, and there are, ya know, like more than thirteen centuries of interpretations and various schools. (Like, people get Islamic law degrees - that’s kinda why the medieval Muslim world was pretty well known for education, you needed the madrassas to be teaching people this stuff)
I have never heard the idea that anal sex was permissible in Islam. The Hadith cited in my link I think are direct enough that basically all traditions would accept them outright.
I don’t understand the 8 years old distinction bit (maybe something to do with the heinous child rape involved in bacha bazi - but that would not be considered permissible by Islamic scholars)
Solid racism. Even if your correlation is “accurate” (according to imperial definitions/measurements of “education”), that’s not causation.
People also tend to have more kids when the life expectancy of their kids if very low. Colonized people have low life expectancy because their labor and resources are exploited by the privileged.
My understanding is that lower fertility follows higher female education for several reasons, including that women in school - and with access to birth control - prefer to wait until finishing school and starting a career before having children. Countries where women have fewer educational and fewer career opportunities, people often start having babies sooner, and more babies overall.
Another oft-mentioned factor is social safety nets such as social security (as much as that can count as a safety net). Areas with no or weak elder support outside of the family tend to have bigger families. Shockingly, this was also the case in the “developed” world back before they developed. Ask older adults in the USA how many brothers and sisters their grandparents had and it is probably a lot more than the next generation had, and the next, etc.
Do colonized people have lower life expectancy or do their children? Or both? Certainly, exploited people may also be living in (and unable to escape from) a society with poor elder care and insufficient safety nets such as social security or other retirement options. Which, of course, makes having lots of kids a totally rational decision. And also limits the ability of many women to participate in the economy outside of the home, which can also slow the development of the country / area’s economy.
Pointing out an objective fact isn’t racism, it just is.
This is just fucking dumb
No one has time for family in Japan
When I watch yt videos about people leaving the workplace at 10pm, I wonder how suicide rate isn’t way higher
Good. We need to depopulate by 50%. The earth can’t have 8 billion people. There are less than 30,000 polar bears in the whole world.
Thats mainly indians and countries around and africans. Why people ignore this small little fact?
It certainly can, if properly managed. But that’s not profitable, so we don’t do it.
Sorry, can’t do that under capitalism perpetual growth
line must go up forever
I know the left really (and rightfully) hates capitalism, but this isn’t a capitalism problem; it’s a society problem. You’ll always need a certain amount of labor to sustain non-working portions of the populations. Thanks to advances in technology the necessary working person percentage is decreasing but you still can’t have the majority of the population be elderly people who will never again be productive.
Warning: swear language ahead
Da fuck “productive” is, for fuck’s sake. Anyone thought of not running human intelligence into fucking ground over a period of… what? Roughly 60 - 20 = 40 years?
Or what, humans can’t think after retirement age because <insert some bullshit>?
You absolutely can have any percentage of <insert random age group>, provided human wellbeing is being taken care of, constantly and in all aspects
Be productive as in literally just that: produce the goods society uses to sustain itself. Intelligence is only one part of the equation here (the rest of it being energy, physical wellness, etc), and even that deteriorates shortly after retirement age when people enter their 70s.
Also I have no issue with swear words, but just spamming them doesn’t substitute for an actual basis for your argument. Unless you want 70 YO people to work factory production lines, they are for all societal purposes unproductive.
I’ve got flash news then: unless I want 70 years old people to work production lines, my job (a developer) can be done by a seventy years old person. Or a job of an artist. Or <insert bunch of professions here>. Physical strength does naturally deteriorate, and that is the only thing that actually
isdoes.Now, to the more important: producing goods? Really? Since when has it become the only thing you look at? And since when producing goods is something only people-under-random-age-limit can do?
Other system are more stable, Egypt lasted for thousands of years, the Ottoman Empire was fairly stable without growth for a 1000. Capitalism is the the system were part of the profit is reinvested into new machinery ‘for efficiency’ to undercut competition. Once we do not have competition because there are only 2 or 3 companies (Coke and Pepsi), they fix prices and work to corrupt government to become an Oligarchy. This is why people make the state that we are entering a ‘post capital’ world.
Egypt lasted for thousands of years,
It’s called “ancient Egypt” for convenience’s sake, but it’s not just one continuous state; it’s many states that either succeeded or competed with each other as the country went through cycles of rise, decline, fragmentation and reunification. For a more familiar example think of it as another, much smaller China.
the Ottoman Empire was fairly stable without growth for a 1000.
Uh… No?
The boundaries changed, plagues came through. But politically it was mostly stable-ish of sorts ¯_(ツ)_/¯ as an economic system
I think it’s entirely possible if we reduce waste and redistribute wealth. The US pays farmers to NOT grow food to keep the price up. Total insanity.
If wage growth went up at the same rate as GDP, one part time worker could support multiple elderly people.
If wage growth went up at the same rate as GDP, one part time worker could support multiple elderly people
Then prices would have to go up at the same rate, and one part time worker would not be able to support multiple elderly people at a reasonable quality of life. It’s not about money; under capitalism money is a shorthand for how much power one has in and over society and isn’t directly convertible into useful goods at a constant rate. What you need to be looking at is total productivity, because that’s the bottleneck here. If X working people can only make Y things a day and X+Z people need 2Y things a day to survive then a society with X working people and Z non-working people can’t survive.
I get what you’re saying, but I feel like you are ignoring how much automation has allowed one person to do the work of many in the recent past. If allowed, this should continue to improve.
Edit: by recent past I mean the last 50-80 years.
Carrying capacity of the earth is something like 15 billion with current technology, our wastefulness and overconsumption (of the rich, globally speaking) is the problem. Which reduction in population can mitigate, but not fix
But do we want to keep heading to capacity? We could have artificial scarcity eliminated with wealth redistribution and waste reduction (cars, fast fashion, food waste, many many etc). The more humans on the earth, the less possible this becomes.
World population is projected to peak out at about 10 billion, likely less because of climate change, so we won’t be getting much closer to the 15 bil limit anyway.
I don’t think climate change will prevent reaching that number, but it will increase the suffering. If we don’t start reversing climate change I believe we will try to adapt to it until we reach the limit of our ability to adapt before we perish. If we are lucky, a small fraction of the species will survive long enough for something to be able to change, but I’m talking a really long time.
Another insane figure: wild mammals make up only 4% of all mammal biomass in the world, the other 96% is humans and our livestock. That 4% includes all whales, elephants, bears, etc.
Get to work juice boys!
They seem to be electing a lot of nationalist anti-immigration cucks. Maybe they should try to fix the problem instead of endlessly complaining about it.
Expecting Japan to ever really throw off the yoke of the LDP is expecting too much.
If the Japanese want people to work 80 hour weeks (and go drinking with their boss every night) maybe they should make polyamorous marriage a thing. Kids are a lot easier to deal with if you have help.
Yeah. Only rich people should have exclusive access to women.
You seem sarcastic, but biologically speaking, the children of rich parents are much more likely to be born rich themselves. Isn’t that a direction we want to evolve into for humanity, given that being born poor has so many negative outcomes?
biologically speaking, the children of rich parents are much more likely to be born rich themselves
Bro, what? Biologically speaking? What are you talking about?
The kids of rich people are rich because their parents are rich. They grow up to be rich because they have their parents wealth, which they either use to create more, or just stay rich.
The fact that they’re rich has nothing to do with their “biology”.What are you proposing anyway? That only rich people procreate and then somehow eventually everyone will be rich? If you can do simple math like addition and subtraction, you’ll realize that that scenario is not possible.
Plus wealth generally means power and connections, all of which makes it easier for someone to get wealthy.
Microsoft would almost certainly have never become what it is if Bill Microsoft wasn’t wealthy enough to have a family computer ahead of most people being able to have one at home, and his mother wasn’t friends with an IBM chair.
Naturally, IBM would be much more likely to hire someone who comes with the recommendation of a higher-up than Afferige Mann, who is applying based on an ad in the paper, and has only worked retail.
Plus wealth gives a safety net. It didn’t matter for Bill if the first few Microsofts failed, he can try again until he hits it big. Afferige has non-such luck. If he starts a company and it folds, he may not have the money to start another.
me and my ex already both tested poor before we had our first baby, so we went ahead with the abortion because the dotor determined he was going to be born poor anway
I didn’t know KenM had a lemmy account!
That’s a form of eugenics. More specifically, it would be classed as “positive social eugenics”.
Clarification
The use of the term “positive” does not mean it is a “good” thing. It just means that individuals with percieved “desirable” traits are encouraged to mate more than the “undesirables”. Conversely, an example of negative eugenics would be murdering/sterilizing the “undesirables”.
“Social eugenics” simply means that the “desirable” trait is not genetic, but rather a social construct, in this case wealth.
If we can all be rich, then sure.
Otherwise it’s just a tool to breed average people out of the gene pool. The end result are rulers and servants. Guess which one your kids will be.
Keep in mind, the only reason why some people don’t have enough is because others have too much.
I think we all largely get what you’re speaking to but I feel compelled to highlight that you can’t breed average people out. “Rulers” and “servants” are social classes, and not “in the gene pool.”
The message got a little muddled there.
that you can’t breed average people out.
Actually, you can. I’m referring to the middle class and their increasing difficulty in raising a family. A significant amount of them are choosing not to, which literally means they don’t get to carry on their lineage.
I’m not going to get into the whys, but very poor people do not have the issue with reproducing that the middle class has.
There is no “middle class”. There’s labor and capital. You’re either serving or getting served. I know very well where I’m at. :/
Duckduckgo “myth middle class” and take your poison of choice.
That’s not entirely true.
People in the middle class have disposable income that lower class people do not. Many of them have enough wealth to live comfortably for the rest of their lives without ever having to work again.
That’s certainly a take on “family business”.
From what i heard from people and read online, i really don’t understand how people even do that. Japanese work etiquette is bananas. But that aside, my job is somewhat high demand, but i draw the line at work hours. I work 42 hours a week and not a second longer. That opens up enough times for some hobbies, enough free time and everything. But if i had kids, most of that would be gone. So if you’re a work horse, you’re expected to give up everything, except work and raising kids.
Literally: they don’t go home, that’s how
Hearing about salary men sleeping on the streets or in train stations is one thing, but when I actually finally saw them in person it broke my fucking brain
Imagine the homelessness issues of a major Californian city but instead of homeless people it’s a bunch of clearly drunk dudes in suits who all vanish by morning
My wife cried hard because the realization hit that hard
Turns out isolationist culture doesn’t stand the test of time. Who knew?
That’s not the main problem here.
Oh? You could optionally expand instead of just stopping at what the problem isn’t.
Other comments had it so I didn’t think it was necessary. Immigration can prop up a low birthrate but that can’t last forever. Need to actually have a culture that supports procreation. And Japan doesn’t really have that. Their work culture is directly responsible for it. I don’t think that’s something easily fixed. Financial incentives could help, but unless it’s pretty hefty it probably wouldn’t be enough.
Australia had a baby bonus for a while. It was a payment you’d get for giving birth to a child. I believe it was like $3K.
But we don’t have an 80hr work week as the norm and we can piss off straight after work without feeling the need to have a beer with our colleagues or bosses.
You could ask him instead of playing leapfrog with yourself.
The problem is the disparity in wealth and a shrinking middle class. Rich people have no problem reproducing, I think musk is on his 14th child.
It did for a few hundred years before they became a vassal state of the US … and wouldn’t you know it the US is also in a birth rate crisis.
Isolationist culture is fine, you just can’t mix it with the crushing reality of capitalism and it’s negative effects on the ability of people to raise families.
Give them some days off.
As an American (or at least a non Japanese native) if my boss came up to me yelling and swearing in my face I would punch him out cold.
Actually if more Japanese did this I think things would improve at the office.
“It’s so expensive to have children in Japan that birthrate is further declining.”
I swear to God these people couldn’t connect the dots with a GPS.
you know…I’ve been saying this in passing for the last decade and I’m starting to believe it.
the rich continue to rape the planet, spurning global warming on at an alarming rate. it’s almost like they don’t care about it–or rather they want it to happen.
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
They don’t care about it getting worse. because global warming is their answer to every goal they have.
Climate change will:
- destabilize world governments
- drastically reduce world population
- displace millions, forcing them to migrate to safe zones
- allow them to capitalize on an opportunity to become “gods”
once half if not more of the planets population has died, the planet might start to regulate itself, though it will never be the same again.
I believe they are trying to take over the world and enslave humanity for their own benefit. climate change is just one of the many attacks they are throwing at the world right now.
It’s not that there don’t care as much as they don’t believe it will affect them personally. They believe they their wealth will protect them.
I think plenty of them also think it’s far enough in the future that it won’t affect them (spoiler alert: it’s not)
Elysium but in New Zealand
We’re already slaves. They are just making it more obvious.
They don’t care about it getting worse. because global warming is their answer to every goal they have.
It’s the classic “we don’t care if the valley floods, we live on the hill” mentality. They think that if/when the world devolves into chaos that they’ll be safe because they’re well off.
precisely, they want the valley to flood because the fields will be fertile and there will be less mouths to feed while they hold all the power.
Except climate change is a flood that won’t go away for 10,000 years. There is no ‘after’ for the rich to benefit from.
The problem with conspiracy theories is that they’re trying to assign a single point of blame to a complete systemic failure. The feeling is that if we can simply find out who is doing this and boil it down to one person or one group we can then simply attack that group and solve all our problems. That’s exactly the ox that fascism has yolked on its ride to power in every single generation.
Very well put.
I think it’s very natural to just want a threat to be known and made tangible.
Things are so insanely complicated, that fixing systemic issues feels insurmountable. It makes one’s head spin and feel rather helpless because it requires either power en masse or concentrated power in the right hands. Especially when there’s bad guys that defend and praise the broken system, but their elimination still wouldn’t fix it.
But man, if there was just some mustache-twirling mastermind in a lair somewhere sending out emails to all the other bad guys, and we took him out to save the world…Hooray! Much simpler! That would be a much more preferable scenario. A cinematic face-off against Skeletor / Palpatine / Rupert Murdoch / whatever, rather than trying to undo the corrupting influence of masses of oppressed people all thinking “But this broken system benefited me so it can’t be that bad bro.”
countries have mostly abandoned climate action change,
It was the government doing window guidance that caused their mess, how do you blame the people who made successful companies that gave Japan its first world living standard?
I blame the people for ignoring their responsibility towards humanity. just because you achieved success does not mean you get to stifle the progress of the world.
as the quote goes, “A rising tide lifts all ships.” when one person installs a levy and only allows their friends access, progress ends and the town(world) will die.
success is not greed, and these people are greed.
pretty much the same in korea, i think korea is slightly worst off, china is beginning to see its effects too, they already trying to change that by “encouraging more sex”, but they arnt solving the underlying issue, which is the one-child policy that devastated the female to male ratio and HCOL. and they also have harsh work ethic.
slightly worst off
worse* off
Well it does get a lot more expensive when almost everybody wants to live in the same tiny square of the country Tokyo’s population will decline in 2035 according to some estimates
With Japan, they only have so much inhabitable land anyway. It’s a mountainous island where all viable land is already pretty much taken.
where all viable land is already pretty much taken.
Very much untrue, the actual issue with living away from one of the major cities is the same thing the US is dealing with: capitalism and a highway system (HSR there) encouraging suburban sprawl and the death of the small town. No need to visit 5 different shops in your small town if you’re going to pass a Donqi on your train ride into work. Then people eventually just move away from the smaller towns entirely to be closer to where the work and businesses are, and the cycle deepens
Although yeah, Japan is about 2/3 as big as California so it’s not as big as people think on top of that
I’m not sure how true this statement is. I go to Japan every year and the child care infrastructure there is incredible.
The healthcare is icredible - you can literally summon healthcare assistant if youe kid is sick at any point for free to your home
Then there’s incredible public transporatiob system, parks, everything is equipped with child support and even culture heavily respects kids so they can do most things independently.
I think they mean expensive time and desire wise and Japanese still work incredible hours many of which seem to actually negatively impact productivity. People don’t feel like such investment is worth it and tbh that could easily shift around with cultural changes but Japan is very allergic to those.
But what about housing? If you live in a shoebox with no hope of getting a larger place, it’s unlikely that you’re gonna have kids.
Housing is pretty good in Japan outside of Tokyo, especially if you don’t mind a bit of a train ride
This is an interesting point. So apparently the problems of having that terrible working culture are solved for (ish) to promote procreation, but it’s not helping. Gee, I wonder if possibly creating a society of miserable people and making it easier for them to create more people they presume will be miserable doesn’t work because they just don’t want to do that.
My first two kids were born in Japan, and they were actually pretty cheap. The local city gives you some money (a few thousand) when your child is born, and day care was good and super cheap, like $10 per day because it was subsidized.
It really wasn’t very expensive.
That an average situation? perhaps you were financially better off than the rest
I was better off, but this was an average government subsidized day care, a neighborhood Hoikuen (保育園). Everything else was just normal stuff. In fact, we didn’t qualify for the few thousand from the city office because we were ex-pats. Medical is free for Japanese. So where are the costs?
You can thank their housing market
Surely if they just instill good Christian moral values like forced birth, racism, and tribal isolationism all their problems will be solved.
I’m not sure why all the sarcasm. I mean, America’s problems have all been solved.
I mean, Japan is one of the more isolationist countries on earth. And racism is a massive issue. Christianity isn’t a major factor, but traditional views on the roles of women and the set up of the household are a major challenge.
If you didn’t notice, those aren’t Christian values. They are christo-fascist values.
Ah yeah I assumed you meant the extreme interpretations of Christian values.
The problems over there are the same problems Americans are starting to rekon with. That’s why you see Vance and his ilk push for this fetishized version of the American dream where every MAGA male gets their own concubine. It’s fantasy and has the exact wrong chilling effect. As it’s trying to answer the same racist question, “more of us less of them.” While what they need is a healthy population which they refuse to recognize requires a diverse composition with plenty of resources.
At least in the US those are basically the same thing
You associate how every you like but I wouldn’t just hand evangelicals the title they so desperately desire.
The other groups largely voted with evangelicals to make our country a fascist nation about 60 40. They don’t deserve as a group to be considered distinct
They don’t deserve to be associated with jesus, what’s your point?
U.S dwelling Christian anarchist here.
I’m sorry for your terrible experiences with so-called “christians” that bought into the americapitalist death cult. Heck, politics aside, everyone’s had a run-in at some point. We’re embattled with those types, too.
But nah, there’s plenty of Christians here that actually read the source material and we’re trying our best out here.
We’re just harder to spot because we’re busy trying to love our neighbor(everyone) and facilitate peace and hope, imperfect as we may be. But we’re trying.
They don’t build mega/(maga?)churches for people like that. These folks don’t get featured on the news, or end up in positions of power, because if they get the chance, they talk about the “Love your enemies” and “The rich won’t enter Heaven” Jesus of the Gospel, not “supply-side God will make you rich Jesus.”
They’re not trying to force theocratic policy, or sling hatred, or act obnoxious in the streets, and they’re definitely not wearing stupid little red hats.
If you encounter one of us, you might not even realize it. If we’re doing a good job, we’re somebody who “looks like they could help.”, someone you can trust, and will show you an unusual amount of kindness for someone you barely know.
If it comes around to it, we’ll share the Bible as a gift, like how anyone nerds out about what they love, not use it as a bludgeoning instrument.
We’re incredibly angry about the State Religion calling itself “evangelical”, and we’re right there with you in opposing these monsters doing the works of Hell.
The churches of the early United States were straight up based. For real, the tophats and monacles of the day thought churches were a leftist threat, and basically systematically undermined them and warped them into capitalism’s ardent apologists we see today. (See: "Behind the Bastards: How the Rich Ate Christianity. It’s mind blowing.)
Anyway, much love, stay safe out there. ❤️
Is this supposed to be a jab at people criticising Christianity? Because the same problems can be found in non-Christian countries, does not mean Christianity didn’t have a role in what happened elsewhere
No, it’s describing how fascists all share similar beliefs, no matter what you call it or where they’re from.
But I bet they will continue to work people to the bone as a point of pride…like I wonder what could be contributing to this problem.
This right here. It’s not that people don’t want kids. It’s that they’re at their breaking point already.
Even if you provide good living conditions and incentives to people they will choose to not have enough kids to sustain the population if they’re given the choice. Statistics from the past 100 years clearly show it in all rich and even poor countries.
We reached 8 billions humans because people, especially women, didn’t have any other choice.
They’ve got women’s rights but they hate immigration, this outcome is inevitable regardless of socioeconomic equality among native born.
Oh, you mean like Karoshi? The term that translates to “overwork death”? Good times. Good times.
Yeah, and in a city with no greenery for kids to play in and afraid to let the kids out of their sight for 1 minute.
Dude, Japan is so safe the cops are largely overglorified tourist and traffic guides. The kids run around alone all the time.
There’s a surprising amount of green for major cities that otherwise look like concrete jungles. There’s usually plenty of parks and kids are in general very safe. Maybe this is just my comparison from originally living in the states, but it is super safe for children and the amount of expected unsupervised travel kids do in Japan is astonishing.
That’s an American point of view
In Japan they let kids go outside without supervision starting a really young age.
The reasons for the low birth rate are purely due to government policy.
In Japan they let kids go outside without supervision starting a really young age.
Yeah I live in Japan and my daughter started going on errands (“go get some milk/eggs”) alone at age 5. All kids are then expected to walk themselves to elementary school starting from the first week, there is no room for drop-offs from a car.
Japan will literally collapse into fire before they allow immigration
Well, that’s why Western right wingers look to Japan. But the difference is that, Western right wingers are looking to regress back into the olden days when women were baby-churners, whereas I don’t hear from Japan wanting the same (there are some but they are not significant enough to sway public opinion).
They want the fantasy of a one income household but aren’t willing to increase wages to make it reality.
The right wing uses this as a dog whistle to rally the uneducated.
Yeah, we both would love to be able to be a one income household, but it’s just but feasible.
I’d like to take the part of the baby churning plan where a homemaker is part of each household. Like, subtract the misogyny where it’s automatically assumed it would be the woman but households with children take a lot of work.
I’d love to be a stay-at-home parent, but I make more money because I have the outside genitalia whereas my partner has the inside genitalia plus chest ornaments, so she’d be the smart choice. That’s literally the biggest difference (beyond her being a much harder worker and my having a disability), yet I make 1.5x her salary. Humans are fucking stupid.
We only make it because of our two incomes, so no one gets to stay home or have kids. Yeah America!
It’s easier to immigrate to Japan than the United States. There are lots of work visas and long term residency can be pretty quick with a professional position. Many of the clerks you see in Japan for ordinary jobs are immigrants from South Asia.
Yeah, I can think of people of many different colors and varieties who would jump at the chance to go over there and help with whatever work they need doing for a decent wage.
People now realise that kids are a lot of hard work and fucking expensive…and that yearly skiing holidays are fun.
Management issues… I know what can help… Introduce Agile.
fear of decline
Damn there must be so much evolution now
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Clearly solid, factual, data there.
