• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Japan may not be a good customer very long.

pointrider

Well-known member
Japan has a serious problem that will affect disposable income more and more as the years pass. It is the birth rate in that country. In 2005 it dropped to 1.25 children per woman, down from 1.29 in the previous two years.

The Japanese government is desperately trying to reverse this trend, but so far has not been successful. As a result of these stats, more and more of the population percentage-wise will be retiring soon. This means that fewer and fewer people will be working and paying taxes, so the tax rate will have to go up to cover services for the retired, etc. The longer this continues, the worse it will get. The total population is dropping. This does things such as making it very difficult to make a company grow, and the competition will become even more fierce. (This is why countries including the U.S. want to grow in terms of total population. Effective demand increases as population increases which makes it easier to sustain growth.)

Believe it or not, the U.S. is rapidly approaching this kind of problem in terms of the base population that exists today. This is one of the reasons, in my opinion, why the govt has been lax on immigrant control. Also, because they see the same thing happening in Mexico, and they know the flow of illegals can't last forever. Mexico has dropped from 7 kids to about 2.5 already. And the U.S. is now at about 2.1 if I remember right. The immigrants who are coming here are having fewer kids than the others back in Mexico, which, as I said, are changing their ways rapidly.

Sorry, I got off the subject of Japan. The problems in Japan are serious for them although there are probably a lot of population control proponents who are celebrating. We just need to think about things like this, and realize that our domestic market is growing and probably deserves a larger share of our attention in terms of the present and the future (at least the near-term and mid-term future).

What do you think?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
I think that a country without the land to grow their own food will always be a good market.

Japan is a country does not have the land base to produce enough food to feed the population they have, that's why they use the only resource they have, PEOPLE!
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Blaming an actuarial reality on a low birthrate instead of fixing the "insurance" program is the real problem here.

Pointrider, why is the problem not blamed on the politicians who set up such a program instead of the population's private decisions of whether or not to have kids?
 

pointrider

Well-known member
In the real world and in a democracy, the old folks want some form of Social Security. They also vote. I have heard many times that the political death of any politician would occur instantly if he were to propose the elimination or even the reduction of Social Security.

In the real world.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
The "slack" in the economy that is taken up by continuous deficit spending. It makes the current measures of the economy look "good" but it does a number on our ability to handle economic shocks. It is kind of like hitting the finanical limit on your credit card. If you can only afford to pay a $500 per month bill, you can leverage spending up to around $16,000 balance on a 3% payback on a monthly balance. If you go up to that limit and then have a big disaster strike, you have little room to move.

GW has already tried the SS thing. If he were not trying to pawn the govt's fiscal irresponsibility onto the public like companies have done to their workers, he may have had more success in SS reform.

The current strategies in govt. are short term and are going to cause great harm in the years ahead. Heck, we may even have a "jubilee" that someone mentioned before.

These problems are not insurmountable, unless you are not willing to work on them.

Read this for the real scoop:

http://www.concordcoalition.org/
 

pointrider

Well-known member
Econ, you really do make some good points. The problem as I see it is you are preaching to the choir (much like a lot of us). To make a speeding comet reverse its course, you first have to stop the speeding comet or put enough pressure on it to cause it to make a U turn.

Don't get me wrong. We need to keep preaching to the choir in hopes that some will listen and act. Maybe -------- maybe something positive will happen.

Back when SS was started in this country, the total population was pretty small compared to today, and I'm certain that most folks believed that the country had a lot of growing to do (not necessarily short-term thinking). There would be more and more folks working and paying taxes including the taxes needed to fund SS. Big families. Population growth. The old folks representing a pretty small portion of the total. "Better than soup lines."

Times change. Water seeks its own level in the world. The cost squeeze begins, and family size starts to drop. Etc. What to do?

"W" is a lame duck President. He is now immune to political death himself unless he ends up fighting off impeachment proceedings which are not likely. But the party is another story. They want him to be careful, because they all want to be reelected.

Some folks believe that Bush's SS proposal to let a portion of an individual's SS account be under that person's control would, in fact, allow that person, through wise investing, have more money in the long run. Others believe that this cannot happen. Perhaps some believe that it's just too risky. "What are we going to do if their investments don't pan out, and then they come to us to bail them out? We can't let them starve to death. Heck, they might vote once or twice before they die."

Back to the comet. Where is the pressure going to come from if it is not happening now? Population demographics are changing rapidly. It's too bad more folks can't sit in the Wal-Mart Supercenter parking lot in Phoenix like I have done and watch the endless stream of new Hispanics driving their new vehicles they are paying for with their new found paychecks and talking their endless, mindless psychobabble on their new cell phones to the folks back home and being totally oblivious to any of the things you talk about. They are so totally excited about their new vehicles, their new cell phones and the money they have to spend in Wal-Mart that they could really care less about anything else right now.

It looks to me like the comet is gaining speed.
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
pointrider said:
(This is why countries including the U.S. want to grow in terms of total population. Effective demand increases as population increases which makes it easier to sustain growth.)

Does this mean flat production/consumption with a growing population is a negative for industry growth? :shock: :roll: :???: :wink:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Pointrider, is there a more sure investment than a long term mutual fund in the USA stock market(excluding real-estate)? If these type investments don't "pan out", doesn't that mean the entire economy isn't "panning out"? I think the problem the government has with this type SS reform, is that some of the money a worker pays in becomes his possession and, if done correctly, could be a wealth building tool for his family.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
pointrider said:
Econ, you really do make some good points. The problem as I see it is you are preaching to the choir (much like a lot of us). To make a speeding comet reverse its course, you first have to stop the speeding comet or put enough pressure on it to cause it to make a U turn.

Don't get me wrong. We need to keep preaching to the choir in hopes that some will listen and act. Maybe -------- maybe something positive will happen.

Back when SS was started in this country, the total population was pretty small compared to today, and I'm certain that most folks believed that the country had a lot of growing to do (not necessarily short-term thinking). There would be more and more folks working and paying taxes including the taxes needed to fund SS. Big families. Population growth. The old folks representing a pretty small portion of the total. "Better than soup lines."

Times change. Water seeks its own level in the world. The cost squeeze begins, and family size starts to drop. Etc. What to do?

"W" is a lame duck President. He is now immune to political death himself unless he ends up fighting off impeachment proceedings which are not likely. But the party is another story. They want him to be careful, because they all want to be reelected.

Some folks believe that Bush's SS proposal to let a portion of an individual's SS account be under that person's control would, in fact, allow that person, through wise investing, have more money in the long run. Others believe that this cannot happen. Perhaps some believe that it's just too risky. "What are we going to do if their investments don't pan out, and then they come to us to bail them out? We can't let them starve to death. Heck, they might vote once or twice before they die."

Back to the comet. Where is the pressure going to come from if it is not happening now? Population demographics are changing rapidly. It's too bad more folks can't sit in the Wal-Mart Supercenter parking lot in Phoenix like I have done and watch the endless stream of new Hispanics driving their new vehicles they are paying for with their new found paychecks and talking their endless, mindless psychobabble on their new cell phones to the folks back home and being totally oblivious to any of the things you talk about. They are so totally excited about their new vehicles, their new cell phones and the money they have to spend in Wal-Mart that they could really care less about anything else right now.

It looks to me like the comet is gaining speed.

Pointrider, the time to change the course of a comet heading toward you is before it gets too close. The closer it gets, the harder it is to change course. We need competent politicians so we don't have to take on their job as well as their own. Pareto seemed to think that we allow the "foxes" to get their way until they make a huge mess of things. It happened last century and was the reason we have the PSA today. It is too bad we have policy makers who have to make us all suffer through this again. Judges should never be given this power alone and yet they are.

There are more and more people seeing the comet. It is too bad we have to rely on their reaction than the wisdom of a previous time.
 

Latest posts

Top