South Korea Is Over
April 12, 2025 7:42 PM Subscribe
Our friends at Kurzgesagt explain why South Korea is over.
how about encouraging immigration
NO NOT THAT WAY
There's also a discussion to be had by people who know South Korea better than I about societies who encourage emigration but not immigration.
The "foreign" population of South Korea is around 2.5 million. There are 7.3 million Koreans outside of Korea.
posted by thecjm at 8:20 PM on April 12
NO NOT THAT WAY
There's also a discussion to be had by people who know South Korea better than I about societies who encourage emigration but not immigration.
The "foreign" population of South Korea is around 2.5 million. There are 7.3 million Koreans outside of Korea.
posted by thecjm at 8:20 PM on April 12
It’s almost like arbitrary lines on maps cause problems and we shouldn’t have so much trouble working with neighbors and the rest of the world to balance our delicate and highly complex systems.
posted by Mizu at 8:45 PM on April 12 [14 favorites]
posted by Mizu at 8:45 PM on April 12 [14 favorites]
We live on a finite planet.
One day we will reach a stable population. If we reach it in an orderly fashion, more solar punk utopia than Warhammer 40K, we will have a low birthrate, and long life expectancies. So there will be challenges.
There will be no need to worry about jobs. Elder care jobs will always be open and actively hiring. The only question will be just how to finance those jobs. A static population also means a static housing base, and I expect it will not have much slack. Such a society would revert to the norm where children are not kicked out of the house at 18, and in fact the eldest child is expected to stay in the childhood home for life and take over it in due time. There's a whole lot of speculative anthropology to write about how society will function.
So when countries go into these birth-dearths, the thing to do is note what adaptations they make, because we'll have our turn sooner or later.
posted by ocschwar at 8:54 PM on April 12 [22 favorites]
One day we will reach a stable population. If we reach it in an orderly fashion, more solar punk utopia than Warhammer 40K, we will have a low birthrate, and long life expectancies. So there will be challenges.
There will be no need to worry about jobs. Elder care jobs will always be open and actively hiring. The only question will be just how to finance those jobs. A static population also means a static housing base, and I expect it will not have much slack. Such a society would revert to the norm where children are not kicked out of the house at 18, and in fact the eldest child is expected to stay in the childhood home for life and take over it in due time. There's a whole lot of speculative anthropology to write about how society will function.
So when countries go into these birth-dearths, the thing to do is note what adaptations they make, because we'll have our turn sooner or later.
posted by ocschwar at 8:54 PM on April 12 [22 favorites]
That show goes out of it's way to not explain the low birthrate beyond it's because women got educated.
The 60+ work weeks? The hard working hours? Oh yes, but why do THOSE exist?
No it won't tell you, because that would be telling on themselves.
posted by Comstar at 9:00 PM on April 12 [25 favorites]
The 60+ work weeks? The hard working hours? Oh yes, but why do THOSE exist?
No it won't tell you, because that would be telling on themselves.
posted by Comstar at 9:00 PM on April 12 [25 favorites]
People in the YT comments are pointing out that the Korean government has recently increased the taxes paid to support retirees, which of course is only going to spur the loss of younger people, making it yet harder to support the aging population. It looks like Japan dipped below replacement rate for the last time about 10 years before Korea (1974 for Japan vs 1984 for Korea), but Korea's rate is currently 0.8 to Japan's 1.3 so I think that ultimately means Korea is speedrunning population collapse faster, despite Japan's head start.
Perusing the table at the bottom of this page it seems like the World as a whole is still managing to stay above replacement rate, but also it's hard to find a highest cost-of-living place without a sub-replacement fertility rate. Korea just seems to have managed to control the exacerbating factors worse than anywhere else.
posted by axiom at 9:05 PM on April 12 [2 favorites]
Perusing the table at the bottom of this page it seems like the World as a whole is still managing to stay above replacement rate, but also it's hard to find a highest cost-of-living place without a sub-replacement fertility rate. Korea just seems to have managed to control the exacerbating factors worse than anywhere else.
posted by axiom at 9:05 PM on April 12 [2 favorites]
No it won't tell you, because that would be telling on themselves.
This is rich coming from the organization shaping the galactic flow of information via its HPG network.
posted by axiom at 9:08 PM on April 12 [4 favorites]
This is rich coming from the organization shaping the galactic flow of information via its HPG network.
posted by axiom at 9:08 PM on April 12 [4 favorites]
Pardon my ignorance and possible lack of search engine fu but what does “HPG network” (from axiom’s comment) refer to?
posted by Lesser Spotted Potoroo at 9:37 PM on April 12 [3 favorites]
posted by Lesser Spotted Potoroo at 9:37 PM on April 12 [3 favorites]
So… is the video good?
posted by Going To Maine at 9:45 PM on April 12
posted by Going To Maine at 9:45 PM on April 12
The person who commented that is named Comstar, which in its fiction is an organization that runs a FTL communication network made up of HyperPulse Generators, or HPGs. They leverage their position as the galaxy's sole FTL messaging system to interfere in all kinds of political stuff and generally get up to a lot of shenanigans. Sorry, I should've realized that if you have no context to understand the reference then I come off sounding insane.
posted by axiom at 9:46 PM on April 12 [14 favorites]
posted by axiom at 9:46 PM on April 12 [14 favorites]
Metafilter: I should've realized that if you have no context to understand the reference then I come off sounding insane.
posted by zengargoyle at 9:55 PM on April 12 [56 favorites]
posted by zengargoyle at 9:55 PM on April 12 [56 favorites]
Kurzgesagt has really gone downhill
posted by june_dodecahedron at 11:59 PM on April 12 [8 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 11:59 PM on April 12 [8 favorites]
Frankly the world might be a better place if there was a news organization devoted to being neutral to all parties. Just Make Sure You Pay Your Phone Bill.
In other news, Samsung Receives Government Approval To Increase The Work Hours To 64 Per Week For Its R&D and Semiconductor Divisions To Boost Competitiveness Against Rivals.
Though a 64 hour week is only going to decrease their Competitiveness Against Rivals. And lower the birth rate.But you know, that's capitalism.
posted by Comstar at 2:55 AM on April 13 [10 favorites]
In other news, Samsung Receives Government Approval To Increase The Work Hours To 64 Per Week For Its R&D and Semiconductor Divisions To Boost Competitiveness Against Rivals.
Though a 64 hour week is only going to decrease their Competitiveness Against Rivals. And lower the birth rate.But you know, that's capitalism.
posted by Comstar at 2:55 AM on April 13 [10 favorites]
There was another video by them that was similar - it was fine but a whole lot of people found the tone off. And I have to say this feels somehow off to me. If I had to guess I'd expect them to move right?
posted by mayoarchitect at 2:57 AM on April 13 [1 favorite]
posted by mayoarchitect at 2:57 AM on April 13 [1 favorite]
It's an odd thing to present to a western audience. Hey, that country you like that makes the music and food you like, guess what's going to happen to them, because of their poor planning! Not until the end of the video do we find out how many other countries are going through the same thing.
I was left with a lot of questions. How much of a demographic crisis is manufactured (e.g., the grueling workweeks mentioned in the video), and how much of it is curable (envisioning pensions as something other than "young person pays for old person")? Are there benefits of the demographic change? (rich countries producing less carbon?) Is there a natural endpoint after which people start having babies again? That is, is this a cycle, and we just haven't measured it over a long enough span?
And how much should we be concerned about this when right-wingers are salivating over the chance to control everyone's reproduction, so we can all go back to having fifteen babies, seven of whom will be dead of measles? I realize I'm conflating the American and South Korean situation here, which isn't quite fair, but I think it would be helpful, when people talk about demographic collapse, if they say what they think the solution is, because it gives you a clearer vision of their politics than if they cut the story off at that point. "Allow immigration and the slow evolution of culture as new people bring new ways to the country" is a lot different than, I don't know, "Me and my philosopher buddies must be allowed to have seven compliant wives apiece, to recharge the nation with our gametes."
posted by mittens at 4:01 AM on April 13 [15 favorites]
I was left with a lot of questions. How much of a demographic crisis is manufactured (e.g., the grueling workweeks mentioned in the video), and how much of it is curable (envisioning pensions as something other than "young person pays for old person")? Are there benefits of the demographic change? (rich countries producing less carbon?) Is there a natural endpoint after which people start having babies again? That is, is this a cycle, and we just haven't measured it over a long enough span?
And how much should we be concerned about this when right-wingers are salivating over the chance to control everyone's reproduction, so we can all go back to having fifteen babies, seven of whom will be dead of measles? I realize I'm conflating the American and South Korean situation here, which isn't quite fair, but I think it would be helpful, when people talk about demographic collapse, if they say what they think the solution is, because it gives you a clearer vision of their politics than if they cut the story off at that point. "Allow immigration and the slow evolution of culture as new people bring new ways to the country" is a lot different than, I don't know, "Me and my philosopher buddies must be allowed to have seven compliant wives apiece, to recharge the nation with our gametes."
posted by mittens at 4:01 AM on April 13 [15 favorites]
Ah the demographic doomsayers. Remember how they were all saying that Russia was going to run out of military age men in just a few months after the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine or that Putin started the war because of the demographic horizon approaching? That was more than 3 years ago. They've gone weirdly silent as their claims completely failed to materialize.
posted by srboisvert at 4:10 AM on April 13 [3 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 4:10 AM on April 13 [3 favorites]
A lot of those claims were overblown, but Russia’s use of North Korean, Chinese and other countries forces suggests that they do have a demographic problem that is exacerbated by their fondness for churning out under-equipped and fed Russian cannon fodder.
posted by rambling wanderlust at 4:58 AM on April 13 [10 favorites]
posted by rambling wanderlust at 4:58 AM on April 13 [10 favorites]
In terms of the math, the video is on point that demographic crisis actually comes really fast in a few generations and the mathematical reasons why. And the point about that it is difficult to recover from a population crisis like this, mostly because to revert it you either have to get to the stable replacement rate or go above it which doesn't look like it's happening any time soon. But the rest of it of specifically South Korea in this position therefore is dooooooomed doesn't really account for many many things. Like immigration. Like work schedules or other societial pressures. It doesn't mention there are ways humans are flexible and figure things out with less people all the time!
This video could have been why the replacement rate matters and here are some ways governments pay attention to it with varying amounts of success and i don't think that would be controversial.
I've liked this YouTube channel overall, but this is fairly poorly done especially with the context of their other work.
posted by AlexiaSky at 6:09 AM on April 13 [3 favorites]
This video could have been why the replacement rate matters and here are some ways governments pay attention to it with varying amounts of success and i don't think that would be controversial.
I've liked this YouTube channel overall, but this is fairly poorly done especially with the context of their other work.
posted by AlexiaSky at 6:09 AM on April 13 [3 favorites]
I liked this video. It explained the hypothetical problems of population collapse really well! It explored more than just the "no money for social security" angle that 90% of other such explainers get stuck in. It also showed how hard it is to turn this around. There is going to be a crisis of some kind, and even in other countries with "better" fertility the crisis is only delayed by a generation or so. And it asked us, the viewer what we want that crisis to look like. We have the agency to build our own future on this. Denying that it's happening won't help.
But the video mostly ignoring the main reason this is happening (capitalism) undercuts it's own arguments. That said, I found myself wondering if this (fertility collapse) is the natural endstate of civilization development. Like when the population gains enough wealth and freedom people have the means and autonomy to choose their own lifestyle. And pretty naturally they choose to enjoy themselves and not have kids. Kids are great. But they have always been a huge investment of time, money, and effort. In the past this investment was understood to pay off as future farm labor or something. But now it's just emotional support humans? And if so, then who needs more than one?
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:18 AM on April 13 [2 favorites]
But the video mostly ignoring the main reason this is happening (capitalism) undercuts it's own arguments. That said, I found myself wondering if this (fertility collapse) is the natural endstate of civilization development. Like when the population gains enough wealth and freedom people have the means and autonomy to choose their own lifestyle. And pretty naturally they choose to enjoy themselves and not have kids. Kids are great. But they have always been a huge investment of time, money, and effort. In the past this investment was understood to pay off as future farm labor or something. But now it's just emotional support humans? And if so, then who needs more than one?
posted by Glibpaxman at 6:18 AM on April 13 [2 favorites]
Such a society would revert to the norm where children are not kicked out of the house at 18, and in fact the eldest child is expected to stay in the childhood home for life and take over it in due time.
And then religious and sexual attitudes that are two generations out of date will be enforced upon the younger people. No thanks.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 6:26 AM on April 13 [5 favorites]
And then religious and sexual attitudes that are two generations out of date will be enforced upon the younger people. No thanks.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 6:26 AM on April 13 [5 favorites]
There was another video by them that was similar - it was fine but a whole lot of people found the tone off. And I have to say this feels somehow off to me. If I had to guess I'd expect them to move right?
Maybe ”We Have To Talk About Weed”? Where they fault themselves for previous videos in which they debunked cannabis vilification, and now cite the progress of Science! to explain their partial re-vilification of it? (i.e. It’s less harmful than alcohol and should still be legal because prohibition doesn’t work, but here is a deep dive on all the bad things that might conceivably happen to you if you use it, especially if you’re a teenager)
They actually pause at an early point in the video, asking people not to blast them in the comments until they’ve finished watching. Whether due to that plea, judicious deletion of comments, or genuine agreement, the comment section is actually full of people confessing cannabis dependencies of one depth or another and thanking the video makers for something that they say helps them in their ongoing sobriety efforts.
Turning back to the matter at hand, I don’t know enough to judge the scientific merits of the South Korea video. But I can say with confidence that the moral of its story is “terrible things happen when women don’t make enough babies”. And that this message - whether their intention or not - lends support to ongoing Christofascist attempts to make women into breeding chattel. So, big failure to read the room there.
posted by Lemkin at 6:36 AM on April 13 [4 favorites]
Maybe ”We Have To Talk About Weed”? Where they fault themselves for previous videos in which they debunked cannabis vilification, and now cite the progress of Science! to explain their partial re-vilification of it? (i.e. It’s less harmful than alcohol and should still be legal because prohibition doesn’t work, but here is a deep dive on all the bad things that might conceivably happen to you if you use it, especially if you’re a teenager)
They actually pause at an early point in the video, asking people not to blast them in the comments until they’ve finished watching. Whether due to that plea, judicious deletion of comments, or genuine agreement, the comment section is actually full of people confessing cannabis dependencies of one depth or another and thanking the video makers for something that they say helps them in their ongoing sobriety efforts.
Turning back to the matter at hand, I don’t know enough to judge the scientific merits of the South Korea video. But I can say with confidence that the moral of its story is “terrible things happen when women don’t make enough babies”. And that this message - whether their intention or not - lends support to ongoing Christofascist attempts to make women into breeding chattel. So, big failure to read the room there.
posted by Lemkin at 6:36 AM on April 13 [4 favorites]
But I can say with confidence that the moral of its story is “terrible things happen when women don’t make enough babies”. And that this message - whether their intention or not - lends support to ongoing Christofascist attempts to make women into breeding chattel. So, big failure to read the room there.
I think this needs to be examined. The video identifies what most people would agree is a problem for humans, at a level similar to climate change (existential). Whatever christofascists make of anything, the problem appears to be real.
We can discuss an absence of a critique of capitalism and radical changes to notions of sovereignty and immigration across national boundaries, but I took the video as a short description of an imminent problem.
posted by ginger.beef at 7:31 AM on April 13 [1 favorite]
I think this needs to be examined. The video identifies what most people would agree is a problem for humans, at a level similar to climate change (existential). Whatever christofascists make of anything, the problem appears to be real.
We can discuss an absence of a critique of capitalism and radical changes to notions of sovereignty and immigration across national boundaries, but I took the video as a short description of an imminent problem.
posted by ginger.beef at 7:31 AM on April 13 [1 favorite]
I know plenty of well adjusted non-conservative women who would love to have more kids if they could afford it and it was easier logistically to raise them. Or could find appropriate men to do it with. How that would statistically work out across a population I have no idea, but even as someone who dislikes kids I don't know why the assumption is that everyone would stop having them if they had the resources and weren't externally pressured into it.
posted by sepviva at 7:39 AM on April 13 [7 favorites]
posted by sepviva at 7:39 AM on April 13 [7 favorites]
The video identifies what most people would agree is a problem for humans
It wasn’t a problem for humans before industrial capitalism.
Whether that timing is coincidental, I leave to the judgement of others.
posted by Lemkin at 9:10 AM on April 13 [3 favorites]
It wasn’t a problem for humans before industrial capitalism.
Whether that timing is coincidental, I leave to the judgement of others.
posted by Lemkin at 9:10 AM on April 13 [3 favorites]
ocschwar: "Such a society would revert to the norm where children are not kicked out of the house at 18…"
Most societies do not "kick" children out at 18 right now, including South Korea.
posted by signal at 10:06 AM on April 13 [2 favorites]
Most societies do not "kick" children out at 18 right now, including South Korea.
posted by signal at 10:06 AM on April 13 [2 favorites]
To the extent the "problem" of falling birthrates arises from shitty working and living conditions, it can be alleviated by making said conditions less shitty, which -- to the extent this is really a problem in economic terms -- employers will eventually be forced to do in order to compete for workers. (Not that Korea seems currently to be much interested in that).
In general, we know what happens when the supply of workers falls: after exhausting all other options, the boss class is forced to treat us slightly more like human beings. See the aftermath of the Black Death, the brief false spring of COVID, etc. The issue here seems to be that the current confinement of this problem within certain geopolitical boundaries may give the boss class an incentive to put its cash elsewhere rather than responding to a particular economy's incentives. That's a real problem, and gets us back to the old principle that capital should be no more mobile than labor. But it's also a problem that will somewhat solve itself once global fertility falls below replacement rate, as should happen around mid-century.
Of course recognizing worker empowerment as the solution is anathema so we end up with fantasies about either AI and robotics or (as in this case) imminent human/ethnic extinction instead.
posted by Not A Thing at 11:04 AM on April 13 [4 favorites]
In general, we know what happens when the supply of workers falls: after exhausting all other options, the boss class is forced to treat us slightly more like human beings. See the aftermath of the Black Death, the brief false spring of COVID, etc. The issue here seems to be that the current confinement of this problem within certain geopolitical boundaries may give the boss class an incentive to put its cash elsewhere rather than responding to a particular economy's incentives. That's a real problem, and gets us back to the old principle that capital should be no more mobile than labor. But it's also a problem that will somewhat solve itself once global fertility falls below replacement rate, as should happen around mid-century.
Of course recognizing worker empowerment as the solution is anathema so we end up with fantasies about either AI and robotics or (as in this case) imminent human/ethnic extinction instead.
posted by Not A Thing at 11:04 AM on April 13 [4 favorites]
The thing that has always irritated me the most about Kurtgesagt is the egregious abuse of Sensible Voiceover in support of the most absurd fantasies about the sustainability of growth.
Thanks all the same, but I prefer fantasies with a bit of integrity.
posted by flabdablet at 11:05 AM on April 13 [1 favorite]
Thanks all the same, but I prefer fantasies with a bit of integrity.
posted by flabdablet at 11:05 AM on April 13 [1 favorite]
It wasn’t a problem for humans before industrial capitalism.
Um, lots of new more reliable contraception was developed after that, so it's going to be pretty hard to draw that comparison.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:21 AM on April 13 [4 favorites]
Um, lots of new more reliable contraception was developed after that, so it's going to be pretty hard to draw that comparison.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:21 AM on April 13 [4 favorites]
To the extent the "problem" of falling birthrates arises from shitty working and living conditions
I think to be more precise it's about the interplay between working conditions and cost of living. The places in the world that have high fertility rates at the moment are almost all in Africa and the Middle East/Central Asia. Is what unites those locations great working and living conditions compared to all of Europe, East Asia, and the Americas? I doubt that proposition.
What they do have is a much reduced cost of living, comparatively speaking, which suggests that anyone looking for a solution to a fertility rate decrease should aim to reduce cost of living (or, increase pay). Of course, the moneyed interests that control so many of the world's countries don't want that! Hence their thumb on the scale showing up so universally.
Of course, there are many other factors at play, such as availability/acceptability of contraception, prevailing religious and societal attitudes around children/families, and undoubtedly a host of other factors. But wow this map is pretty striking.
posted by axiom at 12:20 PM on April 13 [1 favorite]
I think to be more precise it's about the interplay between working conditions and cost of living. The places in the world that have high fertility rates at the moment are almost all in Africa and the Middle East/Central Asia. Is what unites those locations great working and living conditions compared to all of Europe, East Asia, and the Americas? I doubt that proposition.
What they do have is a much reduced cost of living, comparatively speaking, which suggests that anyone looking for a solution to a fertility rate decrease should aim to reduce cost of living (or, increase pay). Of course, the moneyed interests that control so many of the world's countries don't want that! Hence their thumb on the scale showing up so universally.
Of course, there are many other factors at play, such as availability/acceptability of contraception, prevailing religious and societal attitudes around children/families, and undoubtedly a host of other factors. But wow this map is pretty striking.
posted by axiom at 12:20 PM on April 13 [1 favorite]
"Allow immigration and the slow evolution of culture as new people bring new ways to the country" is a lot different than, I don't know, "Me and my philosopher buddies must be allowed to have seven compliant wives apiece, to recharge the nation with our gametes."
As a rule, any public figure or school of thought that’s highly concerned with birth rates is, at some level, the absolute worst. This is a serious issue. We need more thinkers and initiatives that don’t want to send women back to the kitchen or do eugenics. But in order to do that, they have to say: look, it’s capitalism (declining QOL, cost of housing, etc.) plus instability (climate change, social unrest, etc.) Nobody with the money or power to tackle those issues really wants to.
posted by Countess Elena at 12:45 PM on April 13 [3 favorites]
As a rule, any public figure or school of thought that’s highly concerned with birth rates is, at some level, the absolute worst. This is a serious issue. We need more thinkers and initiatives that don’t want to send women back to the kitchen or do eugenics. But in order to do that, they have to say: look, it’s capitalism (declining QOL, cost of housing, etc.) plus instability (climate change, social unrest, etc.) Nobody with the money or power to tackle those issues really wants to.
posted by Countess Elena at 12:45 PM on April 13 [3 favorites]
Such a society would revert to the norm where children are not kicked out of the house at 18, and in fact the eldest child is expected to stay in the childhood home for life and take over it in due time.
And then religious and sexual attitudes that are two generations out of date will be enforced upon the younger people. No thanks.
The opposite. Retrograde attitudes go out the window long before society reaches a steady population state. That's how every demographic transition has gone so far, and no surprise, as retrograde attitudes almost universally entail pressuring women to have children they would not otherwise have.
However....
Housing is expensive to build. The future we're heading for is inevitably different from what we have to day in all sorts of ways, so might as well think about it now and observe right now what is going on in nations like Japanor South Korea. (Or Italy, Spain..)
posted by ocschwar at 4:19 PM on April 13
And then religious and sexual attitudes that are two generations out of date will be enforced upon the younger people. No thanks.
The opposite. Retrograde attitudes go out the window long before society reaches a steady population state. That's how every demographic transition has gone so far, and no surprise, as retrograde attitudes almost universally entail pressuring women to have children they would not otherwise have.
However....
Housing is expensive to build. The future we're heading for is inevitably different from what we have to day in all sorts of ways, so might as well think about it now and observe right now what is going on in nations like Japanor South Korea. (Or Italy, Spain..)
posted by ocschwar at 4:19 PM on April 13
I had previously enjoyed Kurzegesagt videos, but this one was... wow. Complete failure to say *anything* about immigration, and that's kind of impressive as far as omissions go. It's like talking about climate change without talking about... I don't know, maybe the entire concept of renewable energy.
It's such a significant part of the dynamics that "not saying something" about it in fact becomes a fairly prominent "saying something".
posted by Belostomatidae at 5:49 PM on April 13 [3 favorites]
It's such a significant part of the dynamics that "not saying something" about it in fact becomes a fairly prominent "saying something".
posted by Belostomatidae at 5:49 PM on April 13 [3 favorites]
I've previously laughed off concerns about population decline, but the video actually made me think it's a more serious problem than I'd considered. I also still think the world is hugely overpopulated and population decline has to be faced whether we like it or not--and the video didn't have much to say about that.
It wasn’t a problem for humans before industrial capitalism.
If you're thinking of the black death, I don't think that's a fair comparison, because it didn't selectively kill young people leaving lots of old people. Anyway, people didn't tend to live so long at that time anyway.
If you're just thinking that the Earth had a lot less people before industrial capitalism, then I think the video made it clear that having a smaller population is not the problem. The problem is having a fuckton of people who are retired (or would want to be retired) and very few people of working age to support them.
And "who's going to work in the nursing homes" is not really the problem. Presumably the fuckton of retired people need to eat food and buy clothes and get bus rides and have their homes repaired etc etc etc. Somebody has to make the food and the clothes and drive and make the buses.
I think the video was pretty glib about knowing exactly why population is declining
One thing I thought was ridiculous about the video was the idea that fewer children makes it hard to pass along culture. If culture is to be passed along, then the number of children who need to learn it is equal to the number of children you've got, no? It doesn't matter if they are 50% of the population or 1%. If anything, I think having more old people will mean there are more people for the children to get their culture from. Furthermore, I thought the baby boom in the western world was associated with young people rejecting their parents' culture.
I became a fan of Kurzgesagt about 2 years ago. I'm not sure I'd say it's gone downhill. It looks to me like their videos have always included some excellent science communication--and when it comes to philosophy and futurism I think there's often been a strong dose of woo.
posted by polecat at 6:43 PM on April 13 [2 favorites]
It wasn’t a problem for humans before industrial capitalism.
If you're thinking of the black death, I don't think that's a fair comparison, because it didn't selectively kill young people leaving lots of old people. Anyway, people didn't tend to live so long at that time anyway.
If you're just thinking that the Earth had a lot less people before industrial capitalism, then I think the video made it clear that having a smaller population is not the problem. The problem is having a fuckton of people who are retired (or would want to be retired) and very few people of working age to support them.
And "who's going to work in the nursing homes" is not really the problem. Presumably the fuckton of retired people need to eat food and buy clothes and get bus rides and have their homes repaired etc etc etc. Somebody has to make the food and the clothes and drive and make the buses.
I think the video was pretty glib about knowing exactly why population is declining
One thing I thought was ridiculous about the video was the idea that fewer children makes it hard to pass along culture. If culture is to be passed along, then the number of children who need to learn it is equal to the number of children you've got, no? It doesn't matter if they are 50% of the population or 1%. If anything, I think having more old people will mean there are more people for the children to get their culture from. Furthermore, I thought the baby boom in the western world was associated with young people rejecting their parents' culture.
I became a fan of Kurzgesagt about 2 years ago. I'm not sure I'd say it's gone downhill. It looks to me like their videos have always included some excellent science communication--and when it comes to philosophy and futurism I think there's often been a strong dose of woo.
posted by polecat at 6:43 PM on April 13 [2 favorites]
Kurzgesagt is Dora the Explorer with Engineer's Disease.
posted by flabdablet at 9:53 PM on April 13 [4 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 9:53 PM on April 13 [4 favorites]
In 1980, the US birthrate had been below replacement rate for almost a decade. The population in the country was around 226 million. The birthrate slowly rose until it actually hovered around replacement rate from 1990 to 2008. It’s fallen ever since, first you had the Great Recession and then a decade later Covid, and now exploding housing costs. So for all those years of well below replacement birthrates along with some years right around replacement rate, how much did the country’s population change? Well, it’s up 50 percent since 1980. Immigration + longer lifespans have a lot to do with this. But if the population is up that much, we’re running low on water in parts of the country, we don’t have enough housing, and the climate is veering out of control, then how much more population growth will be enough? How high of a birthrate do we actually need?
posted by azpenguin at 10:31 PM on April 13 [2 favorites]
posted by azpenguin at 10:31 PM on April 13 [2 favorites]
Kurzgesagt is pretty sus when it comes to some topics, such as climate change. One of their videos borders on propaganda and lies of omission to argue that the markets will automagically solve everything. Normally I wouldn't pay that much attention to it, because there are many people who have been told that capitalism is magic throughout their entire lives. But then something weird happened. They are or have been funded by the Gates foundation, but they of course deny that they have ever made any "bought" videos. Then people pointed out to them that that's not the only way propaganda works, and that you can just fund outlets that already spread the message you want spread, and you fund them to get their message in front of more eyeballs. And to that they basically (pretended to?) not even understand this point. They didn't deny that that's what's happening, instead they just went on speaking as if that's an inconceivable idea which can't even be understood, and just kept repeating that they have never made any videos because they were given money to do so. It was very weird. And that's when I became very suspicious of the entire channel.
posted by Pyrogenesis at 11:17 PM on April 13 [4 favorites]
posted by Pyrogenesis at 11:17 PM on April 13 [4 favorites]
Glad I am not the only one around with some standing reservations about Kurzgesagt. (I have not watched this particular episode.)
Can be very good, far as I can tell.
But also does trigger the BS alert sometimes.
posted by Pouteria at 1:59 AM on April 14
Can be very good, far as I can tell.
But also does trigger the BS alert sometimes.
posted by Pouteria at 1:59 AM on April 14
The animation is incredibly beautiful and well done. I love their color stories in particular, it’s a very strong aesthetic for approachable infographic things, lots of subtle reinforcement and clarification goes on in there that I probably only notice because I went to school for similar graphic design skills and grew up with animation and comics nerds. There is never anything lazy about their videos, either, like, there are definitely huge blind spots and areas they miss but I never feel like they churn out content just to get stuff out there. It’s always packed with detail and the point presented is thorough. But time and time again, these strengths are used to push neoliberal narratives that feel increasingly trite. Or, used to make the viewer upset in the same civilized way a New Yorker article exposé is supposed to distress our sensibilities. I’m sure some of this is a cultural disconnect; if I recall they are based in Germany? But whenever they dip into anthropological topics I come away annoyed.
posted by Mizu at 3:24 AM on April 14 [1 favorite]
posted by Mizu at 3:24 AM on April 14 [1 favorite]
In general I love Kurzgesagt, it's one of the things I occasionally have playing as audio during my commute.
But this one.... ugh. I just turned it off in disgust.
Here's the thing, I'm not going to say that fixing the abusive and murderous work culture in the ROK, and fixing the 1950's level over the the top misogyny, would actually fix the birthrate (assuming you think it's broken), but maybe try that?
Like, if people are literally working themselves to death because your entire damn country thinks 40 hours a week is just laughably wimpy and Western, and if women would rather gouge out their eyes than live with the sort of men your culture produces, maybe that'd be a good place to start?
But no, as always it will be blamed on those darn women getting uppish and thinking that they're people instead of walking reproductive machines.
But you know what? Just ending the terrible work culture and misogyny so over the top it often makes even AMERICA look enlightened, probably wouldn't actually "fix" the problem.
Becuase the real problem is simple: parenthood sucks.
Don't get me wrong. I love my son. He made my life richer in many ways. But he is also the single biggest source of stress in my life, has been a tremendous economic drain that has meant cutting out a lot of things I'd like to have done.
I'm not saying I regret having him, or I resent him, or I don't love him.
But anyone looking at parenthood recognizes that it's going to mean a substantial decrease in lifestyle, freedom, comfort, and calm.
So is it any wonder that people opt out? Or, if they do have a child, limit it to ONE child not more than one?
If we assume, for the sake of argument, that "declining birth rates" are a major problem that needs to be solved then fixing misogyny and work culture is what I'd call a necessary but insufficient step.
Let's look at what might, actually, truly increase the birth rate in nations where people have the luxury of controlling whether or not they have kids.
Problem 1 - Economics. I actually had it easy, my son was adopted under circumstances that gave him free medical care until he was 18, and that was a major gain. But even so he was still incredibly costly.
Solution 1 - Free medical care for all, including vision and dental, PLUS a monthly cash payment of at least $1000 to cover costs and allow parents to take kids on vacations, give them opportunity for various activities, etc.
Problem 2 - Time, stress, and opportunity costs. The fact is, raising a kid with just two people (or god help us, just one) is exhausting, an exercise in frusturation, a major loss of freedom and a major blow to your sex life, and costs opportunities all over the place.
Solution 2 - For the first 18 months of life all new parents get an absolute minimum of 16 hours of professional childcare assistance to let the parents get a bit of sleep, help with the eternal diaper problem, etc.
From then on, get the parents at least a couple of hours per day, or more, of professional help with kids. That'll be good for parents and kids both. Parents who are less stressed are less likely to snap at their kids and be less than ideal parents, and it'll make the thought of having kids a lot less onerous if you know you can get a couple of hours even if not fully to yourself at least a couple of hours of HELP.
Continue that through most of the kid's school years, if not all of them.
Problem 3 - Mental health. Kids and parents are huge stressors on each other, it's a mental health issue.
Solution 3 - Which really should be assumed to be in Solution 1 but probably won't be unless specifically called out: make mental health services avaialble for free. Need to work things out with your kid? Here's a councelor who can meet with you around your work schedule to help. Kid needs some counelinfg? Sure! You ned some? Sure!
All that is costly, but hey if people having fewer children is a "crisis" isn't it worth it?
posted by sotonohito at 8:57 AM on April 14 [3 favorites]
But this one.... ugh. I just turned it off in disgust.
Here's the thing, I'm not going to say that fixing the abusive and murderous work culture in the ROK, and fixing the 1950's level over the the top misogyny, would actually fix the birthrate (assuming you think it's broken), but maybe try that?
Like, if people are literally working themselves to death because your entire damn country thinks 40 hours a week is just laughably wimpy and Western, and if women would rather gouge out their eyes than live with the sort of men your culture produces, maybe that'd be a good place to start?
But no, as always it will be blamed on those darn women getting uppish and thinking that they're people instead of walking reproductive machines.
But you know what? Just ending the terrible work culture and misogyny so over the top it often makes even AMERICA look enlightened, probably wouldn't actually "fix" the problem.
Becuase the real problem is simple: parenthood sucks.
Don't get me wrong. I love my son. He made my life richer in many ways. But he is also the single biggest source of stress in my life, has been a tremendous economic drain that has meant cutting out a lot of things I'd like to have done.
I'm not saying I regret having him, or I resent him, or I don't love him.
But anyone looking at parenthood recognizes that it's going to mean a substantial decrease in lifestyle, freedom, comfort, and calm.
So is it any wonder that people opt out? Or, if they do have a child, limit it to ONE child not more than one?
If we assume, for the sake of argument, that "declining birth rates" are a major problem that needs to be solved then fixing misogyny and work culture is what I'd call a necessary but insufficient step.
Let's look at what might, actually, truly increase the birth rate in nations where people have the luxury of controlling whether or not they have kids.
Problem 1 - Economics. I actually had it easy, my son was adopted under circumstances that gave him free medical care until he was 18, and that was a major gain. But even so he was still incredibly costly.
Solution 1 - Free medical care for all, including vision and dental, PLUS a monthly cash payment of at least $1000 to cover costs and allow parents to take kids on vacations, give them opportunity for various activities, etc.
Problem 2 - Time, stress, and opportunity costs. The fact is, raising a kid with just two people (or god help us, just one) is exhausting, an exercise in frusturation, a major loss of freedom and a major blow to your sex life, and costs opportunities all over the place.
Solution 2 - For the first 18 months of life all new parents get an absolute minimum of 16 hours of professional childcare assistance to let the parents get a bit of sleep, help with the eternal diaper problem, etc.
From then on, get the parents at least a couple of hours per day, or more, of professional help with kids. That'll be good for parents and kids both. Parents who are less stressed are less likely to snap at their kids and be less than ideal parents, and it'll make the thought of having kids a lot less onerous if you know you can get a couple of hours even if not fully to yourself at least a couple of hours of HELP.
Continue that through most of the kid's school years, if not all of them.
Problem 3 - Mental health. Kids and parents are huge stressors on each other, it's a mental health issue.
Solution 3 - Which really should be assumed to be in Solution 1 but probably won't be unless specifically called out: make mental health services avaialble for free. Need to work things out with your kid? Here's a councelor who can meet with you around your work schedule to help. Kid needs some counelinfg? Sure! You ned some? Sure!
All that is costly, but hey if people having fewer children is a "crisis" isn't it worth it?
posted by sotonohito at 8:57 AM on April 14 [3 favorites]
Saying demographic decay is not an issue because you can fix it with migration, is like saying climate change is not an issue because there is ice on the polar caps that needs to melt first before things get really bad. It is a mitigation strategy at best and is simply kicking the can down the road for somebody else to deal with, and a very good example of the short-sightedness in politics everyone on metafilter likes to complain about.
Also, migration is not really as good an option for SK as for Anglo countries since very few people are going to go through all the trouble of learning Korean in order to move to Korea to work, if they can just as easily move to a country where English is spoken, which almost everyone has at least some previous exposure to through the internet. It's not a magical one-size-fits-all solution.
posted by Barry Boterman at 12:58 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
Also, migration is not really as good an option for SK as for Anglo countries since very few people are going to go through all the trouble of learning Korean in order to move to Korea to work, if they can just as easily move to a country where English is spoken, which almost everyone has at least some previous exposure to through the internet. It's not a magical one-size-fits-all solution.
posted by Barry Boterman at 12:58 AM on April 15 [1 favorite]
Barry, those sound like interesting points and it would have been great if the video had mentioned them.
What I find disturbing and weird is that the video said *nothing* either way about immigration.
posted by Belostomatidae at 7:09 PM on April 20
What I find disturbing and weird is that the video said *nothing* either way about immigration.
posted by Belostomatidae at 7:09 PM on April 20
« Older Not magic, it’s all done with mirrors | Always go to the bathroom when you have a chance Newer »
how about encouraging immigration
NO NOT THAT WAY
posted by phooky at 7:46 PM on April 12 [25 favorites]