There is a solution.

This sounds like the same type of 'science' that global warming alarmists use.

akm91 said:

---

Their civilization will disappear in 700 years if changes not made?

---

No, the decline will accelerate much faster. You will have more intermarriage with others and less and less of a distinct identity and then other groups will gain power and influence over Japan until eventually they are conquered and destroyed. That's how civilizations collapse if you look at Native populations in country after country.

Tom Fox said:

---

It is less a cost issue than a feminism problem.

---

Agreed - and there's a lost generation. But when cities start to become ghost towns a contingent of the population will seize the opportunity of cheap housing to live more conservative lives and they'll be the ones who will breed the subsequent generation as a conservative generation.

Mouse Utopia is a great analogy for modern cities, but it doesn't account for the human spirit and our ability to carve out enclaves - often in the rural spaces. If 1 in 100 Japanese women find the trad-life and have 4+ kids each, you get a population collapse of the urban culture and a small but highly resistant seed group for redeveloping a more traditional Japanese culture.

Japan's average population density is about 900 people/mile^2. I think they will be ok, for next few generations.

On a serious note.

This is what happens when you raise girls to be boys. You give them cars instead of dolls, you educate them too much, you send them to work, you give them easy college admits. Easy jobs. Easy promotions. All the 20 year old girls of my son's age want to be CEOs. No one wants to get married and have kids.

This problem arrives wherever the men are simps who love to virtue signal. Which are in all developed countries.

Muslim countries do not have this problem.

Basically every country outside of Sub-Saharan Africa has a very big problem on their hands with regards to birth rates. And if the current trend continues, Africa will be right behind the rest of us.

There's a data analyst named Stephen Shaw who is researching this very topic and has done a number of podcast appearances to talk about his findings. The two key insights he has are:

1) Although there are many contributing factors around the world, it is far more likely that a single factor is the underlying cause.

2) While the total birth rate is still in decline, for most areas the number of children per mother has remained fairly steady since the 60s. Which is to say that the decline is largely driven by more people not having children at all.

These two points together suggest that the problem is with women needing to choose between their early career and having children, and entirely too many choosing the former. Considering the cost of living and how difficult it's been to have single income families, it's no wonder we're in this mess.

We need to cure aging.

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

It is less a cost issue than a feminism problem.

---

Agreed - and there's a lost generation. But when cities start to become ghost towns a contingent of the population will seize the opportunity of cheap housing to live more conservative lives and they'll be the ones who will breed the subsequent generation as a conservative generation.

Mouse Utopia is a great analogy for modern cities, but it doesn't account for the human spirit and our ability to carve out enclaves - often in the rural spaces. If 1 in 100 Japanese women find the trad-life and have 4+ kids each, you get a population collapse of the urban culture and a small but highly resistant seed group for redeveloping a more traditional Japanese culture.

---

This doesn't happen. If it did, the rust belt would be booming instead of overdosing. It doesn't happen in Europe, it doesn't happen in Asia, it doesn't happen here. People still need infrastructure and the shrinking tax base can't provide basics that a city needs to operate, nor can it support jobs. Subsistence farming in tiny towns doesn't work.

Madman said:

---

There is a solution.

---

I understood that reference. Very underrated movie

infinity ag said:

---

On a serious note.

This is what happens when you raise girls to be boys. You give them cars instead of dolls, you educate them too much, you send them to work, you give them easy college admits. Easy jobs. Easy promotions. All the 20 year old girls of my son's age want to be CEOs. No one wants to get married and have kids.

This problem arrives wherever the men are simps who love to virtue signal. Which are in all developed countries.

Muslim countries do not have this problem.

---

Perfectly stated. This is the issue.

flown-the-coop said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Too many people on this rock as is.

---

Thats a myth

---

The real myth is that populations need to keep growing.

No reason a country cannot reach a nice equilibrium of neither continual growth nor continual decline.

---

There definitely is a reason why a country would not be able to have an equilibrium: Population decline is a vicious cycle. Low birth rates create future labor shortages and small generations of young people necessary to have children. If that's combined with things like large retiree populations, you have a small tax base being squeezed by the retirees for social security and Medicare on one end, and by whatever children they have for food, clothes, diapers, schooling, day care, etc on the other end.

And if it's too much to handle, the old farts outnumber them and will vote in lock step to keep the good retirement benefits flowing. The babies who haven't been born yet have no such representation.

Stmichael said:

---

Basically every country outside of Sub-Saharan Africa has a very big problem on their hands with regards to birth rates. And if the current trend continues, Africa will be right behind the rest of us.

There's a data analyst named Stephen Shaw who is researching this very topic and has done a number of podcast appearances to talk about his findings. The two key insights he has are:

1) Although there are many contributing factors around the world, it is far more likely that a single factor is the underlying cause.

2) While the total birth rate is still in decline, for most areas the number of children per mother has remained fairly steady since the 60s. Which is to say that the decline is largely driven by more people not having children at all.

These two points together suggest that the problem is with women needing to choose between their early career and having children, and entirely too many choosing the former. Considering the cost of living and how difficult it's been to have single income families, it's no wonder we're in this mess.

---

I still have not seen anyone explain why this is "a very big problem".

Are we planning to begin eating humans to feed an ever growing population and so we need more humans as a food supply?

Is there a global labor shortage where we have jobs unfilled and every single person is fully employed or otherwise unavailable?

Are we determining which batches of humans should procreate faster and which should slow down?

Even Elon has not come up with a good, practical reason for more humans outside of "more is better".

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

akm91 said:

---

Their civilization will disappear in 700 years if changes not made?

---

Their civilization will collapse long before that. China's won't make it out of this century. Societal structure and cohesion collapses long before populations die out. You just need to reach a threshold of elderly to young adults in your society that becomes unsustainable.

---

Is this another difficult math lesson? Or was it a hard math lesson, I forget.

Are you certain? Maybe you should stick to being wrong on covid doomsday projections...

flown-the-coop said:

---

Stmichael said:

---

Basically every country outside of Sub-Saharan Africa has a very big problem on their hands with regards to birth rates. And if the current trend continues, Africa will be right behind the rest of us.

There's a data analyst named Stephen Shaw who is researching this very topic and has done a number of podcast appearances to talk about his findings. The two key insights he has are:

1) Although there are many contributing factors around the world, it is far more likely that a single factor is the underlying cause.

2) While the total birth rate is still in decline, for most areas the number of children per mother has remained fairly steady since the 60s. Which is to say that the decline is largely driven by more people not having children at all.

These two points together suggest that the problem is with women needing to choose between their early career and having children, and entirely too many choosing the former. Considering the cost of living and how difficult it's been to have single income families, it's no wonder we're in this mess.

---

I still have not seen anyone explain why this is "a very big problem".

Are we planning to begin eating humans to feed an ever growing population and so we need more humans as a food supply?

Is there a global labor shortage where we have jobs unfilled and every single person is fully employed or otherwise unavailable?

Are we determining which batches of humans should procreate faster and which should slow down?

Even Elon has not come up with a good, practical reason for more humans outside of "more is better".

---

Plenty of people have. Your infrastructure (water, waste, electric) is paid for how? Future and current tax revenues. When retirees outnumber the working class, not only do social problems weigh them down, but so does child bearing (as pointed out above), and at some point the system cannot pay for or sustain itself.

Growing populations with larger and larger tax bases don't have this problem. Life in population decline is not pretty or easy. Again, check out the rust belt.

we now worrying about Japan in 700 years?!?!

how about stopping an Iranian nuclear bomb program annihilating earth in the next 8 years?

heavens11 said:

---

I don't personally understand the thinking that this planets human population needs to continue to grow at any material rate.

Someone is going to have to explain it to me like I'm a second grader why not having more people on this planet is an existential crisis.

---

I haven't been convinced either.

"AI will take everyone's job!" isn't aligned with "we need more people!" And "there aren't enough producers" doesn't align with "import more needy people."

Was just thinking the same thing.
All of those beautiful women around, and the dudes want to play video games, and look at media content.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Stmichael said:

---

Basically every country outside of Sub-Saharan Africa has a very big problem on their hands with regards to birth rates. And if the current trend continues, Africa will be right behind the rest of us.

There's a data analyst named Stephen Shaw who is researching this very topic and has done a number of podcast appearances to talk about his findings. The two key insights he has are:

1) Although there are many contributing factors around the world, it is far more likely that a single factor is the underlying cause.

2) While the total birth rate is still in decline, for most areas the number of children per mother has remained fairly steady since the 60s. Which is to say that the decline is largely driven by more people not having children at all.

These two points together suggest that the problem is with women needing to choose between their early career and having children, and entirely too many choosing the former. Considering the cost of living and how difficult it's been to have single income families, it's no wonder we're in this mess.

---

I still have not seen anyone explain why this is "a very big problem".

Are we planning to begin eating humans to feed an ever growing population and so we need more humans as a food supply?

Is there a global labor shortage where we have jobs unfilled and every single person is fully employed or otherwise unavailable?

Are we determining which batches of humans should procreate faster and which should slow down?

Even Elon has not come up with a good, practical reason for more humans outside of "more is better".

---

I don't necessarily agree that more is better. But population decline is bad and that's what we are talking about here. For example, assuming the decline is evenly geographically distributed (which is logical), you still have all the infrastructure to service that you had before but now you have a lot fewer people to do so. Roads, bridges, water utilities, gas utilities, electrical infrastructure, etc... That's just one of many issues that will degrade standard of living.

infinity ag said:

---

Muslim countries do not have this problem.

---

You sure about that?

https://images.populationpyramid.net/capture/?selector=%23pyramid-share-container&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.populationpyramid.net/saudi-arabia/2020/%3Fshare%3Dtrue

That 30-35 age bracket doesn't appear to have had more than replacement rate numbers of children.

Maybe the home of the holiest city in Islam is a bad example. How about another one?

https://images.populationpyramid.net/capture/?selector=%23pyramid-share-container&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.populationpyramid.net%2Firan-islamic-republic-of%2F2020%2F%3Fshare%3Dtrue

Iran's even worse, they're in decline. How about the country with the largest Muslim population?

https://images.populationpyramid.net/capture/?selector=%23pyramid-share-container&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.populationpyramid.net/indonesia/2023/%3Fshare%3Dtrue

Nope, same story in Indonesia too. But at least they're holding on and not falling off a cliff. Unlike, say, Italy:



So yes, Muslim countries are doing better than Western countries. But not by much.

When 2 people make only one baby the population shrinks

You white folk married couples that choose not to have children at all or wait until your 30's to have just one child aren't helping keep the "white race" around ...........and especially if that one child is a male.......it won't take any 347 or whatever years to lead to extinction......more like about 5 or 6 generations

4 white couples have 1 child each. and wait till they are 35 and "settled" to do so.2 have boys 2 have girls. Waiting from 20 to 35 nocks out a potential generation and a half.

The 2 boys each marry one of the girls. So we have 2 breeding couples. Fast forward another 35 years with 1 couple having a boy and one having a girl .....and another generation and a half lost and we have 1 breeding couple left and they have a boy at age 35

Oops .....no more breeding females left and adios white folk......and only 70 years passed

Reminds me of an old Ag Teacher perspective.

Two bulls standing on the top of a hill. The young bull says, "let's run down there and breed one of those heifers."

The old bull replied, "What if we walk down there and breed ALL of them?"

flown-the-coop said:

---

Stmichael said:

---

Basically every country outside of Sub-Saharan Africa has a very big problem on their hands with regards to birth rates. And if the current trend continues, Africa will be right behind the rest of us.

There's a data analyst named Stephen Shaw who is researching this very topic and has done a number of podcast appearances to talk about his findings. The two key insights he has are:

1) Although there are many contributing factors around the world, it is far more likely that a single factor is the underlying cause.

2) While the total birth rate is still in decline, for most areas the number of children per mother has remained fairly steady since the 60s. Which is to say that the decline is largely driven by more people not having children at all.

These two points together suggest that the problem is with women needing to choose between their early career and having children, and entirely too many choosing the former. Considering the cost of living and how difficult it's been to have single income families, it's no wonder we're in this mess.

---

I still have not seen anyone explain why this is "a very big problem".

Are we planning to begin eating humans to feed an ever growing population and so we need more humans as a food supply?

Is there a global labor shortage where we have jobs unfilled and every single person is fully employed or otherwise unavailable?

Are we determining which batches of humans should procreate faster and which should slow down?

Even Elon has not come up with a good, practical reason for more humans outside of "more is better".

---

You're thinking about as far as the front of your nose.

When social security was introduced, there was roughly a 15:1 worker to retiree ratio. Many hands make light work, so the program made sense and worked for a while.

Fast forward to today, and the ratio is closer to 2 to 1. Plus we now also have Medicare and a much larger debt to pay off as well. And that's with a taxpaying generation (Gen X and Millennials) that is roughly proportionate to the retiree generation (Boomers.)

If we're stretched this thin now, how bad will it be when the curve inverts and there are more retirees than taxpayers? How much of the labor force will be eaten up by elder care? Who is going to be buying houses, cars, and consumer goods to keep the economy going when no one has kids?

And to make matters worse, with an economy in the ****ter and everyone working just to keep the retirees from losing their healthcare and social security payments, who is going to have time to raise children? Thus, the cycle continues.

Assuming my daughter lives to a nice old age, I don't care about anything beyond her great-grandchildren. I just want her to be happy, be fruitful and multiply. Don't want her to have to see any of her offspring directly suffering. Don't care about anything that happens after my girl eventually passes. Comet for all I care.

Crazy that some people care about humans 1,000 years from now.

Rattler12 said:

---

You white folk married couples that choose not to have children at all or wait until your 30's to have just one child aren't helping keep the "white race" around ...........and especially if that one child is a male.......it won't take any 347 or whatever years to lead to extinction......more like about 5 or 6 generations

4 white couples have 1 child each. and wait till they are 35 and "settled" to do so.2 have boys 2 have girls. Waiting from 20 to 35 nocks out a potential generation and a half.

The 2 boys each marry one of the girls. So we have 2 breeding couples. Fast forward another 35 years with 1 couple having a boy and one having a girl .....and another generation and a half lost and we have 1 breeding couple left and they have a boy at age 35

Oops .....no more breeding females left and adios white folk......and only 70 years passed

---

Ultimately all roads lead to US corporations. Which are evil and want an unending supply of labor. They doubled it when they baited foolish women into the workforce when they had a good stressfree life at home. Now they are stuck and in a situation where working moms/wifes laugh at other stay at home wives!!

And all these evil corporations are led by evil CEOs who are okay with destroying society as long as they can make a buck.

But then who allows this? Everyday brainwashed people (many of whom are on TA) who give the CEO a free pass to do whatever he likes just because he is rich and we all aspire to be like him one day. And as we know, rich people are smart and good. And if anyone objects to these rich CEOs, they must be jealous.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Assuming my daughter lives to a nice old age, I don't care about anything beyond her great-grandchildren. I just want her to be happy, be fruitful and multiply. Don't want her to have to see any of her offspring directly suffering. Don't care about anything that happens after my girl eventually passes. Comet for all I care.

Crazy that some people care about humans 1,000 years from now.

---

Why is it crazy that some people have survival instincts going long beyond next week just because you don't have them?

Chatgpt input:
There is a discussion on texags called Japan "disappearing." Based on the comments in that discussion, give a one paragraph summary on how to solve the world's declining population problem.

Output:
The TexAgs discussion on Japan's demographic challenges highlights concerns about the nation's declining population, with over 30% of its citizens aged 65 or older, economic stagnation, and barriers preventing younger generations from marrying and starting families. Participants emphasize that relying solely on immigration is insufficient to counteract such significant population decreases and stress the importance of preserving unique cultural identities. To address global population decline, a multifaceted approach is suggested: implementing policies that support family growth, such as financial incentives and accessible childcare; promoting gender equality to balance work and family life; and fostering economic conditions conducive to raising children. Additionally, while immigration can alleviate some demographic pressures, it must be managed carefully to maintain social cohesion and respect cultural distinctiveness. Ultimately, understanding and addressing the root causes of declining birth rates, including economic and cultural factors, is crucial for developing effective solutions.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Assuming my daughter lives to a nice old age, I don't care about anything beyond her great-grandchildren. I just want her to be happy, be fruitful and multiply. Don't want her to have to see any of her offspring directly suffering. Don't care about anything that happens after my girl eventually passes. Comet for all I care.

Crazy that some people care about humans 1,000 years from now.

---

I care about eternity, so I figure that includes everything between now and then. Nothing complex; just a Christian world view.

The inevitable result of 50+ years of leftists telling women that raising children is degrading and that they need to compete with men for wage labor.

There's a reason that "patriarchy" dominated civilization for millennia, and it will again once liberalism reaches the demographic event horizon.

infinity ag said:

---

Rattler12 said:

---

You white folk married couples that choose not to have children at all or wait until your 30's to have just one child aren't helping keep the "white race" around ...........and especially if that one child is a male.......it won't take any 347 or whatever years to lead to extinction......more like about 5 or 6 generations

4 white couples have 1 child each. and wait till they are 35 and "settled" to do so.2 have boys 2 have girls. Waiting from 20 to 35 nocks out a potential generation and a half.

The 2 boys each marry one of the girls. So we have 2 breeding couples. Fast forward another 35 years with 1 couple having a boy and one having a girl .....and another generation and a half lost and we have 1 breeding couple left and they have a boy at age 35

Oops .....no more breeding females left and adios white folk......and only 70 years passed

---

Ultimately all roads lead to US corporations. Which are evil and want an unending supply of labor. They doubled it when they baited foolish women into the workforce when they had a good stressfree life at home. Now they are stuck and in a situation where working moms/wifes laugh at other stay at home wives!!

And all these evil corporations are led by evil CEOs who are okay with destroying society as long as they can make a buck.

But then who allows this? Everyday brainwashed people (many of whom are on TA) who give the CEO a free pass to do whatever he likes just because he is rich and we all aspire to be like him one day. And as we know, rich people are smart and good. And if anyone objects to these rich CEOs, they must be jealous.

---

Corporations didn't cause that. Society did. What we teach our children did. Progressives did it.

rab79 said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

This has been posted before, but it's a reminder that population collapse is probably the number one global issue and it's mostly ignored. Zeihan has started talking about it much more in his vids.

It still takes humans to manufacture product and provide services.

Quote:

---

Japan's baby count crashed to a new low of 720,988 in 2024, down 5% from last year marking 9 straight years of decline.

...

With 30% of Japan over 65, youth locked out of marriage, and a crushing recession, Yoshida says Japan could be the first to disappear.

---

Many countries are disappearing.

Immigration cannot solve billions in population collapse. It simply isn’t physically possible.

More importantly, we should not lose entire, distinct cultures! https://t.co/LsLp5k95Ak

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 27, 2025

---

Yoshida is extending a less than a decade trend to 700 years? That is not defensible from a statistical standpoint.

---

Yeah that assumption deserves ridicule.

1. Population decreases
2. Less competition for housing and goods
3. More prosperity per person
4. More kids because you now have home and goods.

It is a feedback mechanism.

Buford T. Justice said:

---

Was just thinking the same thing.
All of those beautiful women around, and the dudes want to play video games, and look at media content.

---

It is the girls that are making that choice. Those dudes would breed them in a millisecond if given the opportunity.

Those chicks are holding out for the ideal mate and aging out. Completely absent of self evaluation and what they can actually land.