Why Are East Asian Birth Rates So Low?

[Anonymous]

Why Are East Asian Birth Rates So Low?

This is very interesting as many of the points made are actually true of western culture as well.

Our birth rate started declining most particular as a result of and in association with industrialization/urbanization.

As he pointed out it takes too long for a person to be established enough to start a family, and work demands too much of our time. Throw women into the workforce to and collapse supportive relationships and suddenly life itself becomes impossible.

Still the solution may be cultural, we need to seriously look down on people theses life freeloaders who choose to not do for the next generation what the last generation did for them in being single without children.

Theses freeloaders are worse than mere money freeloaders they are freeloading on life itself and the weight of their freeloading is collapsing our civilization.

[heyuas]

I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

East Asia has a lot of people already. Maybe they could worry about it in the future but not now. If Asia gets more populated things like homelessness and lack of employment will rise.

China has a population of over 1 billion. That’s too many for a country. I understand China has a big land area but 1 billion is still too many. I think it should at least be 300 million - 500 million at most

[heyuas]

It’s not just China that is overpopulated.
I believe Indonesia, Singapore, Japan, Vietnam and Thailand could also enter the list of overpopulated countries

[Asker]

@heyuas A country is only overpopulated if they really can't afford to feed their people. Even in Mao's time with millions starving this wasn't the case. The people of China were not Allowed to feed themselfs, they had previously produced more than enough food.

Japan likewise being a highly technical and industrious country may not have had the land to feed so many directly but more than enough in trade to do so.

Indeed technologies and sea farming in otherwise dead resource deprived areas of ocean with emerging technologies the world could feed many many times more people.

China can support a billion people and they are supporting as many. America could support even more people, as we not only have even more land we have more money and industry.

[heyuas]

China may be a rich county but I still believe it’s overpopulated. I have always heard they have bad air pollution and since they bought in that one child policy is also a sign the president or government thinks so too

[Asker]

@heyuas China actually isn't regarded as a particularity rich country they are a middle income country per-capita.
They just have 5 times as many people As the USA so reaching parity with the U. S. economically is really only reaching 1/3rd our level of wealth.

This of course is a major problem as the video explains as they can't afford all the technical medication efforts Japan and the west are implementing.

The point is they are still more than capable of producing enough food and could in fact produce far more food if needed.

As for their pollution problem that really is because their Communist goverment has refused to allow the implement any kind of local environmental restrictions in the name of ever greater tax revenue and growth, no matter how sick it might make the locals.

[heyuas]

Well like I said before if the population continues to grow things like homelessness and unemployment will rise.
Homeless and unemployment might not be a problem now in China but if the population continue to grow and got to high it will be

[OddBeMe]

I have read about porn issues and tech issues. In Japan, one of the worst, I think, people are afraid to leave their homes and leave their game consoles, computers etc. And porn or sex devices are very popular.

Yet sex isn’t…. I told my wife if this happens to me to shoot me. I’ve pre-recorded a suicide video.

[Asker]

@oddbeme are the porn and tech issues a cause or a symptom of what guys do who can't afford to support families in a social acceptable way?

The cost of living in Japan's cites is out of control for people just getting started, the only people who are young enough to actually have kids. Granted they could accept a lower standard of living and live in the country but that there is the cultural problem.

Their culture like our own tells kids to priorities money over family and sets standards of wealth and stability that most people simply can't meet before their child bearing years are over.

Just look at our movies, how "common" people are portrayed living in million dollar houses.

[OddBeMe]

Research shows that it’s rare for behavior to be affected (ie violent video games) but not impossible. Porn certainly creates addicts which has biologic affects.

And true like our cities, metropolises are getting too expensive to live. But we’re talking birth rates. I don’t think that has anything to do with family values or not enough god in their lives.

I think it’s too damn expensive to have children.

[Asker]

@oddbeme God provides people with a set of time tested rules and guidance on how to live their life.

One of which is Marriage which in turn provides a system of mutual financial support for families consisting only of the necessary and related parties for Children and pool resources to afford theses cost of living expensive in child care both in time and money.

You think homes are expensive and difficult to make and produce now, you haven't seen much of history where they were soo expensive it was normal for 3 generations to live in a single room because that is all they could afford together.

No we as a culture have just become absolutely terrible at managing theses costs because of the collapse of family.

Like it or not F. D. R.'s Social Securty started us down this self-destructive path, combined with the economic revolutions which have allowed for nuclear families pushed us the rest of the way.

[OddBeMe]

Perhaps…but you can’t disagree greedy corporations have made family planning an exorbitant sum. And as I’ve said before, having a child in poverty is child abuse.

[Asker]

@oddbeme Given how rich the 'poor' are compared to basically the entirety of human history that is an absurdly high standard.

Even the poorest of the poor today have access to good and services most all of humans thou-out the history of the species could never even dream of. What they don't nessarly have is a family support system of love and care.
But even then we have substitutes, to put this into perspective just compare the rate of dying today vs just over a century ago the near recent past.
In the 19th century half of all kids would be expected to die before reaching 20, today almost none of them will.

The world has never been safer, with more things to do and see, than it is now.

[Asker]

@oddbeme
Regarding "Greedy corporations" it is indeed true companies are making it difficult to have families and in many areas. But that is also not their job, they are offering you a trade X Job entailing W Work over T Time for C Compensation. It is up to you to know if C compensation is enough to support the local L cost of Living for a family.
Unfortunately we have too many P People who are able to work the job for far lower L cost of Living either because they are doing it overseas (bad trade deal) or they left their family at home in a far lower L cost of Living country.

We also have far too many kids being drawn to the lights and flash of the city in compete ignorance of the L Cost of living there.

[OddBeMe]

Poor is a relative term. Look up how many people live on the poverty line.

[Asker]

@oddbeme You seem to be missing the point, the fact that poverty is relative is in fact the point, today's poor live amazing lives by the standards of nearly all of the human race thou-out history.

You called that abuse, which is absurdly high standards.

[OddBeMe]

That’s irrelevant isn’t?

When a country has 80% of all earnings going to a small percent of people, that’s not sustainable. So a change is needed. The policy is what change? Well the only money is at the top 1% so it’ll involve them somehow.

[Asker]

@oddbeme 80% going to a small share of the population who have demonstrated the best judgement in how to invest is indeed the MOST sustainable economy. It is a proven meritocracy, its what their kids do with the money or politicians who simply take it that tends to be the real problem.

Because in neither case has either party demonstrated the wisdom of how to build economic systems serving the people that not only sustain such wealth but expand it. As such the odds of them losing said money and the industry that created it is very high.

Maintaining inter-generational wealth is difficult and typical depends upon careful training and investments in easy areas not in your control. This is why soo many parents use the trust fund model.

Unfortunately politicians don't have any such option and their egos don't permit such respect fro their own limitations.

[OddBeMe]

Or were born in the right families with the right connections. Either way, upper 5-10% has all the dough…. bottom 80 is closer to poverty- despite whatever luxuries they enjoy- that’s economically not sustainable. So again, where will the policy be starting? At the top 5%. They can either be involved or be against it.

[Asker]

@oddbeme Once again that is very sustainable and required for the reasons already stated.

Beyond your greed and envy for the fruits of the hard work and success of others, is there any real reason you have for believing such a system which already has been mainlined for hundreds of years is unsustainable?

How about you let people have what they put the hard work into making, and you give them a fair trail if you think they stole something.

[OddBeMe]

Seriously…I’m only stating fact. Upper crust of 10%ish has everything. We’re top heavy and could fall over like the French Revolutions. If they were smart they’d realize creating a middle class would balance it out. Because we ain’t got one.

[inhua]

in China there's the Communist Party's One Child Policy

in Korea and Japan, there's hyper-capitalism

[Asker]

While China did indeed force the issue, that is in fact an oversimplification of the problem which is frankly not unique to them.

Capitalism is not making money at any cost, it is simply the freedom to make money. People still choose to live in such places and take jobs forsaking far more basic and essential responsibility to carry on the chain of life as it had been for them.

Althou we might blame the greed of other people who want all your time and energy to enrich themselfs in a capitalist economy you had the choice not to work for them, or simply to say no.

It was the culture which told you to follow him rather than insist upon taking care of your family first.

[inhua]

the powers above us control our resources i. e. food, water, electricity, communications etc. we either follow the system or get ostracized or die. it's everyone for themselves much like America but without the virtue signaling

Japan is currently very screwed. young men are committing suicide or being inundated with porn and video games and sex robots. young women are taking part in porn or chasing after white men instead. the cost of living is extremely high. neither side is attractive enough to the other to want to form families with even if they can afford to support a family to begin with

[Asker]

@inhua This is a cultural problem which is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the exact nature of the problem. Is porn and video games the issue or are they really just a symptom being unable to meet the cultural demanded standards of family (including finding someone 'attractive' enough).

Until recently Japanese marriages like marriages in the rest of the world were arranged. your wife being attractive was NOT the key issue. Then Japan like the west as a whole suddenly started deciding Marriage should be about feelings rather than family.

Naturally as our cultural standards got ever higher thanks to media giving us false unrealistic perceptions of the market (both in terms of how we should live and how pretty our partner should be) more and more people failed to ever meet such standards.

The west had this exact same problem happen to it over a longer period of time.

In both cases it comes down to the redefinition of marriage and the concept of 'love' to be out of reach and unstable.

[inhua]

you ain't wrong about cultural standards. multi-culturalism has always had these problems

better to separate cultures than combine them. the ones who preach it the most are usually the least tolerate of other cultures

[Asker]

@inhua It's rather hard to preach a bad idea while living with its consequences. In the U. S. the elite left preach this as what they think is a means to distory their political enemies and solidify their own control.

You can argue they fought the civil war for very much the same reason.(Remember slavery had nothing to do with it for the first 2 long years from the North's perspective).

They abandoned the idea of goverment by consent of the governed and supported their leaders power lust in no small part out of a desire to dis troy their hated political enemies.

But of course there are dire consequences to facilitating this current invasion just as there were major consequences to the last one. (which was the long term collapse of limits on federal power and corruption).

In the case of the current invasion at rates far greater than we can assimilate (anther concept they made a dirty word for the same reasons) the state itself is becoming increasingly ungovernable, and will eventually fall apart either via balkanization or totalitarian dictatorships. Which frankly looks a lot more likely after the Mar-logo raid on political enemies. Not because just future presidents will jail their opposition leaders, but because the already crooked presidents will refuse to step down knowing what will happen to them.

The cultural balkanization will make that politically possible, just as Congress maintaining the worlds largest and most centralized standing army makes that practically possible.

Its hard to see the American Federal Republic surviving anymore.