He thinks EVERYONE needs to have more kids as the world is going to run into major problems with population decline, like is happening In Japan if trends continue.
I don’t agree with him, but he is advocating for everyone, not white people.
Edit: and he has talked about this many times, it’s not new.
But less people means not enough people to support the layer of pyramid above it.
That’s it isn’t it?
Who’s going to pay for those millions of vacant apartments, and who’s going to support the elderly if there’s not enough people?
Like it or not, there will be a disruption from it if its too sudden, but I don’t see it as the dire thing that he seems to think it is. It’ll eventually sort itself out and we’ll be better for it.
I agree, we can’t grow forever, I just also think there will be consequences to a declining population, but thats okay, and we’ll get through it. The more gradual we can decline the smoother it’ll be.
Continuing our growth would just be worse in the end.
When there isn’t enough people to support the people above them problems start.
Making sure pensions still function properly, having enough health care providers, property values might plummet which in turn impacts retirement for those who have part of their savings in their house (e.g downsizing no longer provides enough funds)
Economic output will drop short of advancements in robots and AI which means there will be less money to support existing infrastructure that was built for all these people. What happens if Japan can no longer fund and maintain their bullet trains due to reduced ridership? They’d start with reduced trains, but that means less money so they get reduced further and further as the population drops. You’ve gone from a once highly connected area to a poorly connected area and that has its own consequences.
Japan is propping up their problem with immigration, but if the trend happens globally, that isn’t an actual viable solution. Somewhere some country will be in a deficit, people get convinced go to wherever the better place is hastening that places decline.
It’ll be a lot of things like that which will cause turmoil and disruption, but it’s not some end of civilization problem.
We’re experiencing a similar problem due to the baby boomers in terms of Healthcare right now. There’s so many of them compared to the younger generations that its taking a toll on things and it’s going to continue to take a toll and we don’t have enough younger doctors to nurses to deal with that.
With the way some country leaders talk about using nuclear weapons these days (Russia and now Israel), it won’t be a gradual decline in world population but a rapid one.
The replacement part is bullshit made up to hate.
He thinks EVERYONE needs to have more kids as the world is going to run into major problems with population decline, like is happening In Japan if trends continue.
I don’t agree with him, but he is advocating for everyone, not white people.
Edit: and he has talked about this many times, it’s not new.
Removed by mod
That’s it isn’t it?
Who’s going to pay for those millions of vacant apartments, and who’s going to support the elderly if there’s not enough people?
Like it or not, there will be a disruption from it if its too sudden, but I don’t see it as the dire thing that he seems to think it is. It’ll eventually sort itself out and we’ll be better for it.
Removed by mod
I agree, we can’t grow forever, I just also think there will be consequences to a declining population, but thats okay, and we’ll get through it. The more gradual we can decline the smoother it’ll be.
Continuing our growth would just be worse in the end.
Removed by mod
It’s just what you said.
When there isn’t enough people to support the people above them problems start.
Making sure pensions still function properly, having enough health care providers, property values might plummet which in turn impacts retirement for those who have part of their savings in their house (e.g downsizing no longer provides enough funds)
Economic output will drop short of advancements in robots and AI which means there will be less money to support existing infrastructure that was built for all these people. What happens if Japan can no longer fund and maintain their bullet trains due to reduced ridership? They’d start with reduced trains, but that means less money so they get reduced further and further as the population drops. You’ve gone from a once highly connected area to a poorly connected area and that has its own consequences.
Japan is propping up their problem with immigration, but if the trend happens globally, that isn’t an actual viable solution. Somewhere some country will be in a deficit, people get convinced go to wherever the better place is hastening that places decline.
It’ll be a lot of things like that which will cause turmoil and disruption, but it’s not some end of civilization problem.
We’re experiencing a similar problem due to the baby boomers in terms of Healthcare right now. There’s so many of them compared to the younger generations that its taking a toll on things and it’s going to continue to take a toll and we don’t have enough younger doctors to nurses to deal with that.
People are upset, people are angry.
But we’ll go on. Its not the end.
Removed by mod
I have never said we should.
Just because there will be consequences doesn’t make it the wrong decision.
There’s no consequence free option here.
With the way some country leaders talk about using nuclear weapons these days (Russia and now Israel), it won’t be a gradual decline in world population but a rapid one.
Is Russia’s even gradual the way their throwing people in the meat grinder right now?