i don't see anything wrong with below replacement fertility, population shrinking, or anything like that
if our options are
>higher wages, more jobs, cheaper housing
or
>literally every metric gets worse AND the nation is flooded with people who won't and can't assimilate
which one do you think i'm choosing?

the "no one to wipe granpas ass in the home" argument also falls flat, that job starts being $20 an hour (as it would be if not for cheap migrant labor) and you'll soon see people taking it

>>18604318
if your TFR is 1.5, you're fine. The "crisis" is just yellow journalism fueled by greedy dangerous technocrats as a way to scold the native population they despise for not producing enough GDP units.

If your TFR is 0.75, you're fucked.

Demiurge in shambles

If your TFR is 0.75, there won't even be enough grandpa's ass wipers. You're just going extinct at that point.

You'd basically have to deindustrialize to maintain a functioning society, but no one would want to, because everyone would be the only child of two parents who were only children, and hence everyone would be accustomed to an incredibly civilized, highly advanced way of living.

>>18604328
Japan hasn't been having kids for decades and they're fine.
China completely banned having more than 1 kid and they're either the largest or second largest economy in the world and growing, depending on what metric you use.

>>18604336
Japan was above 1.3 for the entire period you're talking about. That's double Korea's present rate.

The Chinese 2 child policy came after their TFR hit 7.5 (!!!) in the 1960s and remained above 6 for decades. The situation is completely uncomparable.

You might as well be comparing us to Palestine, where the TFR is only high because they're in a literal state of siege and believe they need to outfuck their neighbor to survive as a nation.

Trust me, we are in uncharted waters. No country has ever been below 1.0 the way SK, Taiwan, and China are

Imagine if, for all the hysteria around Japan's aging population, they had been having half as many children during that time. That would give you an idea of where we are.

>>18604344
It's a moot point because they'll obviously just start importing third worlders, as Japan has already been doing, but I'd like to see an example of a society where they didn't.
I believe China still has a large cohort of backwards rural retards ready to pump out kids for the motherland, unlike Japan and SK.

>>18604348
>I believe China still has a large cohort of backwards rural retards ready to pump out kids for the motherland, unlike Japan and SK.
the rural well ran dry, in fact the birthrate in Manchuria (Chinese rust belt) is near zero because literally all the children immigrated to the urban centers as you described, now it's only old people there. That trick was played out.
Only Tibet and Xinjiang, the non-Han provinces, have above 1.0 TFR. Like Mexican counties in Texas having high TFR, it's not a good sign.

>they'll obviously just start importing third worlders
This would literally be the end, the final acceptance of suicide. It would mean accepting the TFR can continue to decline and decline, the third world TFR will shrink to sub replacement as it has for European third worlders meaning we need to import even more, it would create ghettos or ruin social cohesion, force us into a relationship with their country of origin.
The end...

Some people have suggested importing third worlders only to act as slaves and au pairs, making it easier for natives to have more kids, as is done in UAE.

This would only be possible if the entire country has a fascist mentality and refuses to slip into the trap of giving the workers citizenship, voting rights, benefits, befriending the slaves. And if we had such a mentality, we would not have 0.75 TFR in the first place....

>>18604311
Wait until WW3 starts, the economy will collapse, the crime rate will rise up everywhere, the authority will lose control and South Korean women will start to give birth.

>>18604353
Third world TFR will never shrink, Africa for example will never have a below replacement level fertility rate.
>>18604354
That's only possible in the gulf states because the ruling class are conservative muslims, imo. Wouldn't work in a progressive society like 4b Korea.

>>18604379
>Third world TFR will never shrink
I meant that when third worlders arrive in Europe, their rate eventually equalizes with the native rate, even when they self-ghettoize. Meaning you have to keep taking more of them, assuming you're committed to the suicidal neoliberal route

In the Nordic countries it seems the foreign TFR has even fallen below the native one. The TFR rose by double digits in every Finnish province this year, while the foreign-born rate either stagnated or fell.

>only possible in the gulf states because the ruling class are conservative muslims
Sort of. Another dynamic at play is that the whole native population is essentially the ruling class

>>18604390
What other route is there to go?
>le heckin fascismerino
Not happening.
Their options are import or die. Japan is choosing import, so far SK seems to be choosing die.

>>18604406
>Not happening
why not

>>18604408
Why aren't South Korea and Japan adopting fascism in the 2020s?
1. They're not allowed by their US masters.
2. The people would not accept totalitarian authoritarian regimes.
3. They would become international pariah states, destroying their economies.

>>18604416
you don't sound like you've thought about this seriously.

I don't get the panic. It has to be impossible for the trend to continue indefinitely, right? It's only when you reach your final generation of adults and no kids are following behind them that it makes sense to panic. Once the population declines and everybody gets a little more breathing room, the minority youth should start having higher fertility again.

I just don't see how anyone could think the safety net of the youth population could disappear entirely even if they're a relative minority. No large population of humans has ever aged out completely and died, right?

>>18604431
>Once the population declines and everybody gets a little more breathing room, the minority youth should start having higher fertility again.
You are describing the process of a population finding its carrying capacity. It should overshoot by a little, then fall slightly, before reaching equilibrium.

You are implying we are near our equilibrium population. If that were so, the TFR would be close to maintenance. Instead it is more than two times below maintenance.

Women are waiting until age 35-39 to have one child for the housing discount. That is not the behavior of a population near equilibrium adjusting itself slightly.

>No large population of humans has ever aged out completely and died
We shall see. Like I said, it bounced up by 0.1 this year...

The third world has also been undergoing the drop
Mexico, Chile, India, Brazil, Thailand, Iran are now all under 2.0
Even much poorer countries like Haiti are only 2.55

I wouldnt mind the worlds birth rate collapsing but god and his wicked sense of humor made it so whites and asians got lower first while black and brown birth rate is exploding

what a shitty world

>>18604445
>Women are waiting until age 35-39 to have one child for the housing discount.
Doesn't this one fact speak for itself though? The only thing that can stimulate fertility is housing affordability. Why is housing expensive though? Surely being overpopulated has something to do with it.

If the population decreases enough, then housing becomes cheap. But if you're foolish you'll import foreigners and they'll buy up housing at the same rate natives are dying or faster. Then the natives will never bounce back.

worst koreans deserve to die out because they invented kpop

>>18604457
See>>18604455
They are delayed by 2-3 decades

>>18604458
>The only thing that can stimulate fertility is housing affordability
It's not that simple. There are two lifestyles available to modern women:
1. start a family early, before they turn 30, and have two or three kids.
2. wait another decade, make more money, then have one kid.

Offering an economic subsidy for families, regardless of number of children, could encourage people to have more kids, or it could backfire: more women could choose the second lifestyle instead of the first, which then gives those women a higher net worth than the first kind, which makes it harder to start a family, which leads to more women choosing the second lifestyle.

I know such a backfiring sounds unrealistic, but it seems to have happened!!

As for the chance of a "bounce back", we are 2.8 times below the level required to maintain a population. Unless something drastic happens, the actual size of the population will shrink for decades. And no matter what happens in the future, it is now locked in that there will be roughly half as many 30 year olds 30 years from now as there are now. I don't know what that will do to the economy

I did not explain the scenario where economic subsidy backfires properly. Let me rephrase:

You have three women. Originally, one of them planned to have zero kids and the other two planned to have 2-3 kids. Then the subsidy for families, regardless of size, is introduced. This causes the first woman to have one child instead of zero. The other two women see the first woman get the subsidy, and realize they will now have to compete for the subsidy with a woman with one child who could delay childrearing by a decade, increasing her wealth, and they decide to also just have one kid and still qualify for the subsidy. The total birthrate decreased after the subsidy was introduced

I know it sounds absurd, but it appears to have happened!

>>18604318
No one knows how to stop it or exactly why it's happening. And there have been some pretty draconian governments that have tried to reverse the tied and failed (Ceausescu), so don't think it's as simple as getting a little tough when you change your mind. It's like having a tapeworm, just because you think you're fat and it will do you some good does not mean you have an uncontrolled growing parasite in you that is wasting your body away and will not stop when it's unhealthy. A below TFR society will eventually genocide itself.

Second of all the Capitalist system we all unwisely subscribe to absolutely demand line constantly going up. Much of sacred GDP growth is actually just population growth. It does not have a mechanism to handle a line go down society. It's not actually a robust system, it's very delicate and prone to meltdown. The Great Depression was not objectively a time of actual great scarcity and hardship compared to the recent past, and yet the global market shit itself and we got a World War out of the situation because of global market allergic shock destroying itself in panic.

Most importantly of all: it's dysgenic. Genetic IQ / high quality human capital is one of the most important factors for social abundance. All high quality highly developed nations correlate with high genetic IQ populations - by sheer coincidence. Smart people do not have children at the same rate as dumb people. When you are below replacement level this effect magnifies and your lower IQ population becomes more and more of a society defining genetic bottleneck.

Below replacement TFR unchecked does not just genocide all Japanese eventually. At a much faster and uneven rate it starts to genocide the smartest first. This is even worse when you consider the taboo truth that not all human ethnicities/races have the same genetics. And below replacement societies mass important lower quality human capital, which have much higher fertility than the native population.

arranged marriages fell out of favor the same time Japanese tfr fell off a cliff, as did marriages and relationships in general, prior to that you had thousands of years of such marriages, cats out the bag with feminism and the manosphere in south korea as it is not compatible with marriages that aren't arranged, there is no turning it around outside of actual incentives like paying thier women substantial sums, equivilanet of 1 million usd in their economy

>>18604311
It's mainly a housing issue.
>expectation: a family should have their own home, with separate room for all children
>reality: the average family can at best afford a 40 m2 apartment with a mortgage

Yeah, no shit people aren't having more kids. Instead of mortgage discounts, the government should just build cheap housing, that's the only thing that ever worked to have a somewhat healthy housing market. The US had a 2+ TFR until the 2008 crash because it was still easy to buy a fairly large home (with illegal NINJA loans, but still).

>>18604495
Ceausescu didn't fail

>>18604509
US government won't do that because they're currently anti-mexican and the 2008 crash was basically correlated with mexican tfr crashing, white was not as affected.

Even now, since the 2022 inflation crisis, latino and black tfrs are plummeting while white remains mostly the same

i'd expect as long as american govt is racist they won't build housing, which is pretty evil for poor whites.

>>18604431
>No large population of humans has ever aged out completely and died, right?
You sure about that? That's basically what happened to the Spartans.

What is likely to happen before there's literally only a man and woman left, refusing to have children together, is that a more robust society comes in and destroys and subsumes the smaller and then disintegrates it. That's what happened to the Spartans. They were so anemic in population they critically lost to the Thebans and then later the much more numerous Helots finally pulled off the big slave revolt that was always promised. Over successive generations the Spartiates disintegrated as a unique people.

How many Manchurians do you know? They used to be millions and rule China. Now there are like less than 20 native speakers of Manchu. Eventually they will be totally synonymous with the Han Chinese.

That's probably what would happen to Korea before the literally last dozen of them on the peninsula. Once North and South Korea are under a million people China (itself probably a dying nation, but one with more fat) could just roll in and subsume the Koreans. If third world immigration doesn't destroy them as a people first.

>>18604514
>not building favelashacks is anti-mexican
lol