Dying Countries
It seems some southern European countries are dying right along
with some Asian countries. Older people living longer, younger people not
having babies, country dies. Simple. I hadn't realized that the
situation was so bad in Italy, for instance.
This article in the New York Times -- No Babies? -- is massively long but interesting on a number of levels. First, the United States is not dying. It's thriving. And Norway is not dying, either. But Japan, Korea, Italy, Spain, and Greece are all in jeopardy to one degree or another. Second, the reasons for these population declines are complex, but some of the solutions may not be that hard at all. If you look at the countries that are thriving, you see two paths to life -- (1) provide maximum flexibility and opportunity for employment for women, even though there are few safety nets from the government, or (2) provide substantial government support for families to compensate for the relative lack of flexibility in the workplace. The U.S. offers a lot of opportunity, whereas the northern European countries offer more security. Both seem to work for those respective cultures. And the third bit in the article I found fascinating was that the countries failing on both accounts are dying. In other words, those countries with cultures that are evolving, and changing, and modernizing socially to support women and children seem to be surviving, but the others who are not are not keeping up at all. What a kick. How's that for evolution? I'm skipping a few steps here, but I hope that's enough to wet your appetite for this article. It's a very good read.
How does Japan fit here? Well, the lack of women in the workplace is pathetically obvious, and birthrates in the country are alarmingly low too. The two seem connected. But it's not only the support of women and children (in the form of govt subsidies or employment flexibility) that matters to sustain a population in a modern society (the "modern" bit is the key to the entire article, by the way). Another factor is how much men are involved in the raising of children. Here in Japan it's well known that most men are not that involved -- although I'm encouraged to see the younger guys all over their kids, which is great. However, the vast majority of men are working all the time (which is clearly not necessary and obviously inefficient, but that's another story). This only reduces the support of women and children. It's sad. But it could actually be deadly, too.
But cultures need not die. They can change. And that's the good news. The article also points this out. In the U.S., for instance, it's socially acceptable now for dads to be directly involved in raising their kids, and it's getting to the point where it's totally unacceptable for them to not be involved. This wasn't always true in many parts of the country in even my lifetime. So, in modern America if you work till midnight every day with a kid at home you are a dirtbag. That's not true in Japan. In fact, in many cases the exact opposite is true. You are a hard worker, supporting your family, supporting your society. I explained the dirtbag comment to a friend here one time, and she was rather surprised. That's the power of culture. It's a paradigm. Things only make sense on the inside. That's why openness is critical. You need to consider all options from outside your paradigm to keep checking if the stuff on the inside makes sense. We'll have to see in a couple of decades how it all shakes out, which cultures thrive and which cultures die out.
This article in the New York Times -- No Babies? -- is massively long but interesting on a number of levels. First, the United States is not dying. It's thriving. And Norway is not dying, either. But Japan, Korea, Italy, Spain, and Greece are all in jeopardy to one degree or another. Second, the reasons for these population declines are complex, but some of the solutions may not be that hard at all. If you look at the countries that are thriving, you see two paths to life -- (1) provide maximum flexibility and opportunity for employment for women, even though there are few safety nets from the government, or (2) provide substantial government support for families to compensate for the relative lack of flexibility in the workplace. The U.S. offers a lot of opportunity, whereas the northern European countries offer more security. Both seem to work for those respective cultures. And the third bit in the article I found fascinating was that the countries failing on both accounts are dying. In other words, those countries with cultures that are evolving, and changing, and modernizing socially to support women and children seem to be surviving, but the others who are not are not keeping up at all. What a kick. How's that for evolution? I'm skipping a few steps here, but I hope that's enough to wet your appetite for this article. It's a very good read.
How does Japan fit here? Well, the lack of women in the workplace is pathetically obvious, and birthrates in the country are alarmingly low too. The two seem connected. But it's not only the support of women and children (in the form of govt subsidies or employment flexibility) that matters to sustain a population in a modern society (the "modern" bit is the key to the entire article, by the way). Another factor is how much men are involved in the raising of children. Here in Japan it's well known that most men are not that involved -- although I'm encouraged to see the younger guys all over their kids, which is great. However, the vast majority of men are working all the time (which is clearly not necessary and obviously inefficient, but that's another story). This only reduces the support of women and children. It's sad. But it could actually be deadly, too.
But cultures need not die. They can change. And that's the good news. The article also points this out. In the U.S., for instance, it's socially acceptable now for dads to be directly involved in raising their kids, and it's getting to the point where it's totally unacceptable for them to not be involved. This wasn't always true in many parts of the country in even my lifetime. So, in modern America if you work till midnight every day with a kid at home you are a dirtbag. That's not true in Japan. In fact, in many cases the exact opposite is true. You are a hard worker, supporting your family, supporting your society. I explained the dirtbag comment to a friend here one time, and she was rather surprised. That's the power of culture. It's a paradigm. Things only make sense on the inside. That's why openness is critical. You need to consider all options from outside your paradigm to keep checking if the stuff on the inside makes sense. We'll have to see in a couple of decades how it all shakes out, which cultures thrive and which cultures die out.
My brother moved to Japan and married a Japanese career woman. When I asked why she hadn't married a Japanese man, she smiled and informed me that Japanese men consider someone of her age (mid-30's at the time) "undesirable" and the fact she had a career was a real deal-breaker.
In the US, neither of those would have been a consideration for most men. I wonder if the narrowness of mate-selection criteria is an indicator for societal (dis) health?
Posted by Justpassithru on September 19, 2008 at 07:22 AM JST #
From where i'm sitting the world needs more people like it needs a hole in the head, and needs more first worlders like it needs that hole putting there with a rusty butter knife...
Growth. Growth. Growth. Cancer grows. What's so precious about growth?
What am i missing?
Posted by Jon Ellis on September 19, 2008 at 08:23 AM JST #
Jon ... sure, cancer grows but so do trees and flowers. :) I agree that overpopulation is also not a good population, but Japan will die -- die dead die -- unless it replaces itself. So, it's probably more accurate to say replacement than growth.
Posted by Jim Grisanzio on September 19, 2008 at 10:24 AM JST #
I don't actually believe that Japan will shrink away to nothing... and i suspect that if you try to imagine a mechanism for that to happen for a while, neither will you.
What i do believe is that growth has become a mantra, a dogmatic axiom of capitalism, that is used to promote the myth that "a bigger pie means a bigger share for everyone", and intellectual fraud known as "trickle down economics". I'd point to the widening gap between rich and poor in most industrialised nations as proof of this, and state quite flatly that population growth benefits only those who seek to exploit a larger market.
The northern european nations that attempt to strike a balance between capitalism and some aspects of socialism seem to be doing much better at improving the quality of life of their citizens than the unfettered free markets so beloved by those of anglo-saxon stock.
Stability might not be very interesting, be the downside of up isn't exactly a stroll in the park either; see current crisis of confidence for an indication of what happens when pyramid schemes start to unwind...
Posted by Jon Ellis on September 19, 2008 at 10:51 AM JST #
Justpassithru ... I can see the reality of what you say with a lot of the older guys, but I don't see these opinions held as tightly among the younger people. It's there but just not as much.
Posted by Jim Grisanzio on September 19, 2008 at 08:57 PM JST #
Jon ... I don't disagree with your view of economics. And as an American, I'm tired of the boom/bust model that we Americans love so much. However, I do think you can have growth without having it be exploitive. I think at some level everyone wants to grow. Most people want more. They want to improve in whatever they do. They want better things for their kids, etc. That doesn't have to be extreme, though. But on the other hand, if a population is not even replacing itself, I can't see how it will have any economic viability once it passed below a certain level. The situation is Japan is *extremely* scary from an economic perspective. I don't think there are any modern examples of a modern country dying out from population decline, so no one really knows all the issues. But Japan will lead the world in this (along with S. Korea and Italy and Russia and a few others), so we'll all find out.
Posted by Jim Grisanzio on September 19, 2008 at 09:08 PM JST #
I grew up in Italy and I lived for 12 years in Spain. I think that the problem of these two countries, and maybe it’s the same for other countries in the list, is just based on three factors.
First is the expectation for the very own life. Some years ago in Italy, as in many other countries in Europe, people had fewer expectations from life. I mean, if you ask to someone at that time – Seriously and realistically what do you expect in your life or what do you think you can achieve in your life? – Every medium or poor class person, with an average culture will answer something similar to – Well I just want a job and a good woman that give me many children and a decent home, I don’t aspire anything big, I’m not reach. I want to live in peace – That’s all. Simple isn’t it? At my parent’s young age, people thoughts were simpler than now, not so much expectations. The idea to have a family, live in one city, speak one language, and do simple things was very common.
Nowadays people think about all the things they can do and how many of them they can’t if they create a family. For example, many friends of mine and me think in that way.
I’m 33 and I want to do a lot of things in my life. I know that actually I can do that things, it’s not so hard in the actual world to realize almost anything. If I have a child or many, I don’t want to spend my time thinking about education, doctors, school and countless more things. I just think that there are so many people in the world, so I just want to use my time here to do things I like.
Second. How expensive is life? It’s too hard to find a decent employment and a decent salary. Many people that I know wish to create a family but it’s too hard to afford the expenses generated by a child. Instead to have a sacrificed life they prefer to simple forget the idea. Governments do not provide any help.
Third is education. More culture means a better understanding of society, economic and life expectations. This factor is really important, because people with a decent educational level are used to think beyond the simple daily matters. These people understand the importance and responsibility to have a child and how difficult is to fit it all together to have a happy life and at the same time maintain a family.
In fact it’s not difficult to see in Spain and Italy that the zones more depressed and poor of those countries are the ones with a higher birth rate. Those zones match the three cases: Poor education, poverty, therefore less life expectations.
From my point of view and after spent almost all my life between Italy and Spain, those are the main reasons those countries are becoming old… Anyway in case of Italy I think it won’t disappear, there are more Italians outside Italy than inside, so we can comeback, someday ;)
Maybe the day the government starts to think on people instead on politicians, and taxes are used for the country instead to pay loans generated by politicians… Really it’s a country that can rule alone without a government.
Posted by Pietro on September 21, 2008 at 03:16 AM JST #
Russia wasn't mentioned. Russian male life expectancy is ~55 and falling. For women it is higher but the average age for Russian females is over 30 and for the rare woman who wants a child it is difficult to find a parnter that wants to help. The high rate of abortion under communism has left a long shadow that stretches into the "democratic" era as well.
Russia is setting itself up for a very massive and very very fast decline in population - which will be hard to manage since it is the world's physically largest country. It is already underway (the population of Russia proper has declined since the end of communism) and may soon be unstoppable. Add to that the fact that the former soviet republics around Russia are fast reproducing muslim countries along with the fiscal/financial crises of the government (papered over temporarily by oil and natural gas prices) and you have a serious situation. Next door, resource poor and cash rich China may someday want to stop buying US treasury bills and instead simply buy parts of Siberia outright.
Don't laugh Russia has sold of hunks of land in the past: one of them was called Alaska.
Posted by Vodka Neat on January 08, 2009 at 04:49 AM JST #