this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
285 points (96.7% liked)
World News
32327 readers
476 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem is that you still need a productive group of people to fund and care for retirees. Japan has the ability to absorb millions in its rural towns. It just doesn't.
It's not as easy as absorbing people into rural towns and I suspect you know that.
Yeah, but it seems better than the alternatives of letting those towns collapse.
So you're going to have towns full of retired old people? Maybe also include their caretakers and maybe service workers supplying everything the caretakers need. Oh, and schools for the caretakers children. And teachers, obviously. And maybe some industry for the caretakers spouses to work at.
Retirees aren't going to keep towns alive. They're just usually among the last to leave.
Immigrants don't want to live in rural towns. I remember when a group of refugees were bussed in Sweden and they revolted that they didn't get to stay in a city.
I mean even LOCAL people don't want to live in rural towns, that's why they're depopulated.
And then we'll need more people to look after those young ones when they retire and then we'll need more people to look after those young ones when they retire and then we'll need more people to look after those young ones when they retire and then we'll need more people to look after those young ones when they retire
No, no more growth. It's going to hurt the current generation but it's for the greater good. It's time to have a population decline