on the basis of their Japanese ancestry
most of them are not descendants of japanese. they payed money and got adopted with family resister brokers in their home country.
Hot Topics | |
---|---|
on the basis of their Japanese ancestry
Takechanpoo wrote:on the basis of their Japanese ancestry
most of them are not descendants of japanese. they payed money and got adopted with family resister brokers in their home country.
New census figures in Japan show the population has shrunk by nearly one million in the past five years, in the first decline registered since 1920.
As of October last year the country has 127.1 million people, 0.7% fewer than in the last census.
Demographers have long predicted a drop, citing Japan's falling birth rate and a lack of immigration.
The rapidly ageing population has contributed to a stagnating economy and worries of increasing health costs.
Sharp drop-offs
Japan now has 947,000 fewer people than when the last census was conducted in 2010, figures released by the internal affairs ministry show.
Only eight prefectures, including the capital Tokyo, saw a population increase, national broadcaster NHK. reported.
The remaining 39 all saw declines, including Fukushima which saw the largest drop of 115,000 people.
Fukushima, site of the doomed nuclear power station, was hit especially badly by the 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
Japan has seen population growth for much of the past century, but this has been slowing rapidly in recent decades. The last census showed the population had completely stopped growing.
Friday's numbers mark the first time a decline has been recorded in the census.
Researchers are predicting a sharp drop-off in the working population and a simultaneous rise in the number of elderly in coming decades.
According to government projections, by 2060 about 40% of its citizens will be sixty-five or older, and the general population will be one-third smaller than it is now.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has made it a priority to boost the birthrate from 1.4 children to 1.8 children per woman, including improving childcare and tax incentives. Advanced economies usually require a rate of at least 2.1 for a stable population.
Mike Oxlong wrote:Japan population shrinks by one million census confirmsNew census figures in Japan show the population has shrunk by nearly one million in the past five years, in the first decline registered since 1920.
As of October last year the country has 127.1 million people, 0.7% fewer than in the last census.
Demographers have long predicted a drop, citing Japan's falling birth rate and a lack of immigration.
The rapidly ageing population has contributed to a stagnating economy and worries of increasing health costs.
Sharp drop-offs
Japan now has 947,000 fewer people than when the last census was conducted in 2010, figures released by the internal affairs ministry show.
Only eight prefectures, including the capital Tokyo, saw a population increase, national broadcaster NHK. reported.
The remaining 39 all saw declines, including Fukushima which saw the largest drop of 115,000 people.
Fukushima, site of the doomed nuclear power station, was hit especially badly by the 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
Japan has seen population growth for much of the past century, but this has been slowing rapidly in recent decades. The last census showed the population had completely stopped growing.
Friday's numbers mark the first time a decline has been recorded in the census.
Researchers are predicting a sharp drop-off in the working population and a simultaneous rise in the number of elderly in coming decades.
According to government projections, by 2060 about 40% of its citizens will be sixty-five or older, and the general population will be one-third smaller than it is now.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has made it a priority to boost the birthrate from 1.4 children to 1.8 children per woman, including improving childcare and tax incentives. Advanced economies usually require a rate of at least 2.1 for a stable population.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35666274
Mike Oxlong wrote:Japan population shrinks by one million census confirmsin the first decline registered since 1920.
kurogane wrote:I get that at least part of the point of most such articles is to punish Japan for not doing as Whitey says and allowing the mass immigration that has been such an unqualified boon to so many Western societies (esp. this past summer), but I find it amazing there is such little discussion of controlled or strategic shrinkage. I am wearing a merino wool cardigan I bought at The Gap 4 or 5 years ago from the Seconds rack for about $9 Cdn. It's sized as an XXL but some hot water washes and a clothes dryer have made it a comfortable L size. It also tightened up the knit to make it softer and more durable. It probably looks a bit ratty, but it fits fine and serves its purpose.
kurogane wrote:I find it amazing there is such little discussion of controlled or strategic shrinkage.
Grumpy Gramps wrote:Mike Oxlong wrote:Japan population shrinks by one million census confirmsin the first decline registered since 1920.
So during WWII, when they were culled like sick chicken, thay still kept a growth rate going? The grand parents of today's generation must have been busy like rabbits; respect
yanpa wrote:Grumpy Gramps wrote:Mike Oxlong wrote:Japan population shrinks by one million census confirmsin the first decline registered since 1920.
So during WWII, when they were culled like sick chicken, thay still kept a growth rate going? The grand parents of today's generation must have been busy like rabbits; respect
Net growth of 12 million between 1945 and 1950:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Japan
which is still 10 million up over 1945. There's a net growth of 5 million between the 1940 and the 1947 census: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9B%BD ... 6%9C%AC%29
So yes, until now there's always been a population increase from one census to the next. Also: WWII failed as a population control measure.
These are the 20 countries about to grow bigger than a shrinking Japan
Japan is good at making lots of things—except more Japanese. In its latest census, Japan’s population shrank by one million people.
The decline is expected to continue indefinitely. Having topped out at around 128 million, by the end of the century only around 80 million Japanese will remain, according to the UN. Of course, forecasting anything that far into the future is an inexact science. But nobody doubts Japan’s daunting demographics, with an aging, shrinking population making it harder to grow the economy, balance the government’s books, and replace retired workers.
To put Japan’s dwindling population in perspective, consider its steady slide in the rankings: from the fifth-largest country in 1950 to 10th today and 30th in 2100. Its financial might won’t fall as fast as that, but its current struggles to revive a moribund economy presage the struggles ahead.
During the lifetime of kids born today, the distribution of the world’s population will change markedly—the charts below show the 20 countries that will grow larger than Japan between now and 2100; 15 of them are in Africa.
Human brotherhood is a beautiful ideal. We’re all human. Differences of skin color, body odor, facial features, language, culture, religion, citizenship and so on veil — but only lightly — our shared humanity. They have fueled hatred, and continue to, perhaps more so of late; but they need not, and one day will not. Japan can point the way.
Among the more eloquent spokesmen for that ideal is Hidenori Sakanaka, former director of the Tokyo Immigration Bureau and current executive director of the Japan Immigration Policy Institute, which he founded in 2005. Why not, he has been saying since then, welcome 10 million immigrants to Japan by 2050?
It’s a hard sell. Japan hypes its warmhearted omotenashi (hospitality) toward foreign visitors. Foreign residents are another matter. No Japanese government has ever been voted out of office for strictly limiting their numbers. Human brotherhood does not, on the surface, seem a Japanese forte.
Sakanaka, writing in the weekly Shukan Kinyobi, argues otherwise. For him it’s a question of national survival. One possible interpretation of figures released earlier this month by the government’s National Institute of Population and Social Security Research is that Japan is dying of demographic anemia.
More
Taka-Okami wrote:Sorry, multiculturalism doesn't work. All you get is a cesspit of every group trying to get advantage over the other.
Tsuru wrote:without it, the debt-based fractional reserve banking system comes crashing down
Wage Slave wrote:London
Wage Slave wrote:New York
Wage Slave wrote:Singapore
Tsuru wrote:The real reason population growth is an absolute must for the economy is that without it, the debt-based fractional reserve banking system comes crashing down and the exponential growth demanded by shareholders is definitely no longer possible. More people means more ability to create and sustain debt and thereby grow the economy for the minority who currently accumulate the wealth. Managed population decline should be a serious option instead of simply telling people they should sell their souls just to "save the economy", whatever the hell that actually means. Besides, most western nations are already eating themselves at top speed to satisfy shareholder greed, by stagnating wages and reducing employee protection even with mass immigration in play.
So no.
Tsuru wrote:the debt-based fractional reserve banking system comes crashing down and the exponential growth demanded by shareholders is definitely no longer possible.
Until that time status was generally ascribed by birth. But irrespective of people's birth, status has gradually become more achievable.
It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others. Ability of a conventional kind, which used to be distributed between the classes more or less at random, has become much more highly concentrated by the engine of education. A social revolution has been accomplished by harnessing schools and universities to the task of sieving people according to education's narrow band of values. With an amazing battery of certificates and degrees at its disposal, education has put its seal of approval on a minority, and its seal of disapproval on the many who fail to shine from the time they are relegated to the bottom streams at the age of seven or before.
The new class has the means at hand, and largely under its control, by which it reproduces itself. The more controversial prediction and the warning followed from the historical analysis. I expected that the poor and the disadvantaged would be done down, and in fact they have been. If branded at school they are more vulnerable for later unemployment. They can easily become demoralised by being looked down on so woundingly by people who have done well for themselves. It is hard indeed in a society that makes so much of merit to be judged as having none. No underclass has ever been left as morally naked as that.
They have been deprived by educational selection of many of those who would have been their natural leaders, the able spokesmen and spokeswomen from the working class who continued to identify with the class from which they came. Their leaders were a standing opposition to the rich and the powerful in the never-ending competition in parliament and industry between the haves and the have-nots. With the coming of the meritocracy, the now leaderless masses were partially disfranchised; as time has gone by, more and more of them have been disengaged, and disaffected to the extent of not even bothering to vote. They no longer have their own people to represent them.
{snip}
In the new social environment, the rich and the powerful have been doing mighty well for themselves. They have been freed from the old kinds of criticism from people who had to be listened to. This once helped keep them in check - it has been the opposite under the Blair government. The business meritocracy is in vogue. If meritocrats believe, as more and more of them are encouraged to, that their advancement comes from their own merits, they can feel they deserve whatever they can get. They can be insufferably smug, much more so than the people who knew they had achieved advancement not on their own merit but because they were, as somebody's son or daughter, the beneficiaries of nepotism. The newcomers can actually believe they have morality on their side.
So assured have the elite become that there is almost no block on the rewards they arrogate to themselves. The old restraints of the business world have been lifted and, as the book also predicted, all manner of new ways for people to feather their own nests have been invented and exploited. Salaries and fees have shot up. Generous share option schemes have proliferated. Top bonuses and golden handshakes have multiplied. As a result, general inequality has been becoming more grievous with every year that passes, and without a bleat from the leaders of the party who once spoke up so trenchantly and characteristically for greater equality.
Tokyo Metropolitan University professor Kiyoto Tanno. “I think, the current environment being what it is,” he argues in a separate Shukan Kinyobi piece, “that immigrants are best advised not to come here.” Circumstances are such, he says, that “if they do come, they won’t be happy.”
That is unfortunate, in his view, because Tanno, like Sakanaka, believes Japan would be the better for a foreign infusion. He doubts it’s equipped to receive one, however. He sees the foreign workers here — numbering 1.08 million as of October 2016 — being treated more as commodities than as human beings. Legal restrictions of their length of stay and occupational mobility constitute, in effect, a cynical invitation to meet Japan’s temporary labor needs and then go home. The U.S. and the EU, he says, are more flexible in that regard.
Sakanaka suggests reasons. Europe generated ideals but Christian monotheism — “only my religion is right, all others are wrong” — hindered their flowering. The U.S., historically “an immigration society,” was built partly on slavery, “the New World’s original sin.” Japan has its faults, but religious exclusivism and mass enslavement are not among them.
A less tainted past can, Sakanaka hopes, make for a more humane future.
Taka-Okami wrote:Rawanda, Yugoslavia and a host of other multicultural shitholes worked well didn't it. Mark my words. When the economies properly collapse there WILL be hell to pay.
I recently had a few trips to Malaysia (not tourist) and that joint is a powder keg. Chinese hate the Malay's and vice versa. Same around Southern thailand. You've got your head so far up your arse Wageslave, you have no clue how the world really works.
matsuki wrote:last I checked, "Mass Enslavement" was not a current issue in the US
wagyl wrote:matsuki wrote:last I checked, "Mass Enslavement" was not a current issue in the US
A little bit of Devil's advocacy here, but I don't think anyone can deny lingering racial issues in the US, and I don't think anyone can deny that they are as a result of a past history of slavery.
Wage Slave wrote:Tsuru wrote:the debt-based fractional reserve banking system comes crashing down and the exponential growth demanded by shareholders is definitely no longer possible.
You a commie?
Haven't banks always been debt-based fractional reserve. Is there any other way to run a bank? I'm not sure shareholders are in much of a position to demand anything as the board always has proxy voting on their side. And anyway shareholders don't demand exponential returns - they might dream of them but anyone who knows what the word exponential means knows it's almost always impossible. Shareholders take risk and hope to get a return commensurate with that risk.
I'm more worried by the way that the people who run big companies are free of any control, including shareholders, to take risk, to enrich themselves, to tax dodge and get bailouts when they need them.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests