Skip to main content

Population collapse -- what they really mean (Corrected)

 In the movie Deadpool there is a scene where one of the bad guys is being crushed by a slow-moving road compactor.  In the scale of human existence, that's what is happening with population collapse in Japan, China, and Italy.  At first, you don't notice because most people live in the city, and it is hard to notice changes in population density, it could actually be increasing!  However, the countryside is different.  A good friend, American Japanese, decided to purchase a house in Japan, it is about 90 minutes from Kyoto, and the cost was 100 Yen (about US$ 10.00) for the house and grounds.  The owner had died a few years before and there was no demand for such a house in Japan anymore.  A very nice house still.  The same story for Italy, where in the countryside you can buy a house for a Euro, but go to the main Italian cities and you will see no changes, the same with the tax base since again the cities are responsible for most of the tax revenues.

Tweaking the birth rate just a little bit had huge long-term implications, shifting the birth rate from 2.1 to 2.3 (child per woman) and the population growth changes dramatically, from memory if you start with a standard population distribution the difference if you start with 1,000 women is that instead of 70 years it takes 30 years to double the population.

But, and this is the problem, 30 and 70 years are things humans have a hard time accepting.  A friend just bought "a 20-year-old convertible Mercedes", that's what he said, but when I saw the car it was a 1982 convertible, I said that's not a 20-year-old car, it's a 40-year-old car -- he looked at me and said, you are right I didn't mean a 20-year-old car I meant a car from the 80s...in his head the year 2000 was just yesterday not nearly a quarter of a century ago!

Japan's declining population is not visible because it is happening elsewhere (in the countryside) and it would be hard to notice in the cities.  In China, early signs of population pressures started to be visible about five years ago, as wages started rising -- over the last decade manufacturing wages have risen by a factor of 15.  

The question of population collapse is therefore very abstract in the short term.  China still has a 1.2 million soldier army in place, is building warships and so right now, at this minute, China officially doesn't have a population problem, in fact with the withdrawal of US manufacturing demand in China wages should start dropping.  Providing a signal that everything is all right.

However, the eggheads know differently! Using China's own data it would seem that using current mortality tables and the current population breakdown, by 2100 (in 80 years) China's population will have declined from its current 1.3 billion to less than 700 million.  However, that assumes that these figures are correct, that women's reproduction rate remains at 1.4 -- but the reality is that this is unlikely as the first place to see a population decline (higher birth rate) is the countryside as people re-locate where easier jobs are into the city.  Therefore, we should expect that this 1.4 level will decline to less than 1.0 (rumors are that it's already there), This is where statistics play a nasty trick, for if the birthrate is 1.0 instead of 1.4, then it's not 2100 but 2050, not 80 years but 30 and if it's 0.7 it is 2025 years, and by 2100 the Chinese population would drop to less than 100200 million.

Again, like all projections, this assumes that everything else is equal, this is not real, China could "force" women to have children by making all forms of contraception illegal.  We are not there yet, it remains that reversing the trend is difficult if not impossible.  

The true nature of a richer world is that birthrates collapse as citizens move away from the countryside where children are short-term assets (labor) to the city where children are an expensive luxury item.  

(I changed the numbers because apparently, I underestimated the impact of compounding)





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

what people get wrong about tariffs

 The issue is simple. What percentage of the economy is dependent on tariff goods? The truth, is that the US economy is far more closed than people understand. People genuinely believe that all manufacturing has ceased to exist in the United States all given to China on the altar of woke policy the truth can be further from That statement. Only about 15% of US GDP is related to foreign trade. Of that amount, slightly more than half is from Canada in Mexico. And half of that is energy. What that means, is that about 7% of US GDP is tariff dependent. The proof in the pudding, is how little money tariff generates. People think that 30 or 50 billion is a lot it’s not in an economy that has $3 trillion. The impact on the US economy will be less visible but not absent. Inflation hasn’t occurred yet first because tests have hardly started to bite, but more importantly it’s such a small percent of the economy. Now certain things are critical. The rare earth metals from China were critical....

The end of Tesla?

 it takes a special kind of idiot, to think that he can antagonize his entire customer base, and think that it will not impact his business. When Elon Musk went to work for Donald Trump, and created the doge department, he antagonized every liberal, and these people represent 90% of his client base.That’s not a brilliant move. Now Elon Musk is worth hundreds of billions of dollar, so he shouldn’t care a great deal, however, he needs to care because of several other issues. The cyber truck has been a disaster, most have had to be recalled because of defective glue, it’s not a truck, it’s not a car, it’s noisy, relatively uncomfortable, but great as a development platform. What Tesla has learned in making car manufacturing more seamless is truly amazing. The problem was that Elon Musk was so pissed with the Democrats, and with Joe Biden, in particular because of some slight, which were just plain stupid too. By the way, that he decided to support with hundreds of millions of dollar, ...

Demographics

 I am preparing a kind of family tree for our children so that they know where they came from.  In my family I am the only survivor, although my brother and sister died recently they were both in their seventies (a story I told already).    It was a fun process, but it provided more than that.  First, I married relatively young I was 26 when I married and nearly 30 when our first child was born.   I was looking at my ancestors.  On my mother's side, she had 6 siblings, Four died before the age of 30, two in war, and two from illnesses.  Only she and a single sister survived.   The two boys had a child each but they died in WWII, and the other sister died as an infant.   what is interesting is that every one of my mother's siblings had children in their early 20s.   I know that my mom was hardly 20 when my brother was born.    What is remarkable is that among our friends, we are the only ones to have fou...