日本人口危機(jī)到達(dá)臨界點(diǎn)

@itmeboh
It's almost like there's this radical idea that if it gets too expensive to literally live, maybe just maybe, it's not affordable to grow a family. This isn't rocket science.

這幾乎就像一個激進(jìn)的想法：如果連“活著”本身都變得太過昂貴，那么，也許，只是也許，組建一個家庭就成了不可負(fù)擔(dān)之重。
這又不是什么高深的火箭科學(xué)。

@jelly.212
Onions comment

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）這評論真是一針見血，讓人想哭。

@kygo
Yep, and when the population declines, things will get cheaper, and then people will be able to afford to have kids again and the population will stabalise, it's not a big deal.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）沒錯，當(dāng)人口下降時，物價就會變便宜，然后人們又能養(yǎng)得起孩子了，人口就會穩(wěn)定下來。沒什么大不了的。

@txquartz
?@kygo actually, things will become more expensive as the population shrinks

（回復(fù) @kygo）實(shí)際上，隨著人口萎縮，物價會變得更貴。

@AsianJayWalker
it's not corect though. populations, fertility rates were high (sometimes at their highest) through peak poverty and highly expensive times.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）不過這不正確。在極度貧困和物價高昂的時期，人口、生育率都很高（有時是最高的）。

@geomonabe
?@kygo nope nope. Salaries remain high when supply of labour declines, if anything it will get more expensive to live. Remember Japan doesn't have a housing shortage. They have a young people shortage.

（回復(fù) @kygo）不不。當(dāng)勞動力供應(yīng)下降時，薪水會保持高位，如果說有什么變化的話，那就是生活會變得更昂貴。
記住，日本沒有住房短缺，他們有的是年輕人短缺。

@hemantsarthak
?@kygo we cant say for sure, because now ecnomincs and people in general depend on cities, and in cities things getting cheaper means you are in a deflation spiral, not a place you should be or something like japan a stagnant economy, with stable housing prices.
Probably the best way would be:
Govt owned free community style housing on rent to own model with max 3 houses a person can buy based on number of children. Design them such that a couple has easy room for three children's plus parents, and has playground and daycare center built in etc.
(Preferably make it rent to lease on 100 yr transferrable leases (so people can move to other cities jobs etc, with whole family without worrying about housing as the lease get transferred to the new property), and invest the money into dividend stocks etc, and give them to the parents, while keeping 1-2% for govt yourself to invest and grow more)
Tax individual at @30% and reduce it 25 if married, and 5% more for each child born
Make 15month parental leaves madndaotry for both parents, and make companies pay extra tax if there workforce doesn't meet the 2.2 fertility rate criteria ( so they pay employees more or design policies such that employees can date and have children ) reduce tax to companies that meet the 2.2 fertility rate criteria.
Free healthcare and education till the age of 20.
Make pension and healthcare come out of individual salaries for the individual itself, something singapore style (like tax 20% more, 10% is invested for that persons retirement 5% for healthcare 5% for child house/eductation/healthcare/forced emergency savings etc) avoid the ponzy scheme like structure of the current pension systems.
I think these type of radial changes are needed for population growth and stabilization.

（回復(fù) @kygo）這可不一定。因為現(xiàn)在經(jīng)濟(jì)和大眾普遍依賴城市，而在城市里，物價下跌通常意味著通貨緊縮，那可不是什么好兆頭，甚至可能像日本那樣，陷入經(jīng)濟(jì)停滯，只有房價保持穩(wěn)定。
或許最好的方法是：
1.  政府提供免費(fèi)的社區(qū)式住房，采用先租后買的模式，每個人最多可根據(jù)子女人數(shù)購買三套。住房設(shè)計要能輕松容納一對夫婦、三個孩子外加雙方父母，并內(nèi)置游樂場和日托中心等。
2.  （最好是提供100年可轉(zhuǎn)讓的長期租約，這樣人們可以帶著全家搬到其他城市工作，而不用擔(dān)心住房問題，因為租約可以轉(zhuǎn)移到新房產(chǎn)上。政府則將（租金）收入投資于高股息股票等，并將收益分給有孩子的父母，同時自己保留1-2%用于再投資和發(fā)展。）
3.  個人所得稅稅率設(shè)為30%，結(jié)婚后降至25%，每生一個孩子再減免5%。
4.  強(qiáng)制實(shí)行15個月的父母雙方育兒假。如果企業(yè)員工的生育率達(dá)不到2.2的更替標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，就對其征收額外稅款（以此促使他們提高員工薪資或設(shè)計便于員工約會生子的政策），對符合標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的公司則減稅。
5.  提供直到20歲的免費(fèi)醫(yī)療和教育。
6.  養(yǎng)老金和醫(yī)療保險直接從個人薪資中為個人繳納和儲蓄，類似新加坡模式（比如多征收20%的稅，其中10%投資于個人養(yǎng)老金，5%用于醫(yī)保，5%用于子女住房/教育/醫(yī)療/強(qiáng)制性應(yīng)急儲蓄等），以避免當(dāng)前養(yǎng)老金體系那種類似龐氏騙局的結(jié)構(gòu)。
我認(rèn)為，需要這類激進(jìn)的變革才能實(shí)現(xiàn)人口的增長和穩(wěn)定。

@susanaaragorn8606
Thwy will not do that becaise they only care about the finantial world having all...?@hemantsarthak

（回復(fù) @hemantsarthak）他們不會那么做的，因為他們只關(guān)心金融界能擁有一切……

@WolfH3
?@hemantsarthak very good points

（回復(fù) @hemantsarthak）非常好的觀點(diǎn)。

@seriously-m1p
@hemantsarthak
Ah yes, the socialist/communist idea of anything ever being “free”.
Such a deceitful sales tactic.

（回復(fù) @hemantsarthak）啊是的呀，（你這些都是）社會主義/共產(chǎn)主義關(guān)于任何東西都是“免費(fèi)”的想法。
多么具有欺騙性的銷售策略呀。

@lifeinhd4053
@hemantsarthak Don't have time to critique all this but will point out #1 will only encourage companies to not hire single people, and given poor job prospects is a barrier to relationships/marriage/potential children, this will only worsen the problem.

（回復(fù) @hemantsarthak）沒時間逐條評論，但要指出第一點(diǎn)（對已婚已育者減稅）只會鼓勵公司不雇傭單身人士。
鑒于糟糕的工作前景本就是建立親密關(guān)系、結(jié)婚生子的障礙，這只會讓問題雪上加霜。

@Kon420
?@hemantsarthak mostly agree except that we should have universal healthcare and free public higher education and trade. Why should there be an age cutoff?

（回復(fù) @hemantsarthak）大部分同意，除了我們應(yīng)該擁有全民醫(yī)保、免費(fèi)的公立高等教育和職業(yè)教育。為什么要設(shè)年齡限制呢？

@pedro_8240
@hemantsarthak Regarding point 5, isn't it like this is most places? You pension "comes from" your contributions during your work life, but since inflation, usually, exists, and the government needs to pay pensions for the current retirees, those pensions come from what YOU pay for your retirement, and your pension will come from what younger generations will pay for their retirement.
It's not realistic to expect the government to just store away the money you paid for your pension fund, while also correcting it for inflation.

（回復(fù) @hemantsarthak）關(guān)于第五點(diǎn)，大多數(shù)地方不都是這樣嗎？
你的養(yǎng)老金“來自”你工作期間的繳款，但由于通貨膨脹的存在，并且政府需要支付當(dāng)前退休人員的養(yǎng)老金，所以那些養(yǎng)老金實(shí)際上來自“你”為自己退休所支付的錢，而“你”未來的養(yǎng)老金則將來自更年輕的一代為他們自己退休所支付的錢。
期望政府只是把你繳納的養(yǎng)老基金原封不動地存起來，同時還為通貨膨脹進(jìn)行保值調(diào)整，這是不現(xiàn)實(shí)的啦。

@josephrobinson6171
?@kygo Not necessarily. When the population declines, there are less people making the things, and less people making specialised niche things too, and less people providing valuable services such as healthcare. Also, if a population shrinks through just not having children (so not calamities like war or plague) then there will be less working-age people compared to non-productive old retirees. Thus, the working-age people will have to produce more to support the retirees, who still consume as much as the working age people but without producing anything.

（回復(fù) @kygo）不一定。當(dāng)人口下降時，生產(chǎn)商品的人會減少，制造專門的小眾產(chǎn)品的人會減少，提供像醫(yī)療保健這樣有價值服務(wù)的人也會減少。
而且，如果人口僅僅因為不生孩子而萎縮（而非戰(zhàn)爭或瘟疫等災(zāi)難），那么勞動年齡人口相對于不事生產(chǎn)的老年退休人員就會更少。
因此，勞動年齡的人必須生產(chǎn)更多來供養(yǎng)退休人員，而退休人員的消費(fèi)水平與勞動年齡的人相當(dāng)，卻不產(chǎn)生任何價值。

@eneseren25
?@kygo that works not like that the big cities will be more expensive and the rural areas emptier and poorer.

（回復(fù) @kygo）事情不是那樣運(yùn)作的。大城市會變得更昂貴，而農(nóng)村地區(qū)會更空曠、更貧窮。

@AnOnlineDweller
?@kygo The problem is that it can lead to short-term economic turbulence since there won't be enough workers. And more importantly, millions of elders will be left without care

（回復(fù) @kygo）問題在于，這可能導(dǎo)致短期的經(jīng)濟(jì)動蕩，因為沒有足夠的工人。
更重要的是，數(shù)以百萬計的老人將無人照料。

@lembitmoislane.
@kygo That’s incorrect. Large populations encourage mass production, which cheapens prices. By having a dying population the production will go down and hence priced will rise. This means that ironically not having kids because of a poor quality of life will only make life less affordable.

（回復(fù) @kygo）那是不對的。龐大的人口能促進(jìn)大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)，從而降低價格。
人口萎縮會導(dǎo)致生產(chǎn)下降，因此價格會上漲。
這意味著，具有諷刺意味的是，因為生活質(zhì)量差而不生孩子，只會讓生活變得更難以負(fù)擔(dān)。

@kygo
?@lembitmoislane. People aren't having kids because clothing is too expensive... It's because they are forced to live in tiny little apartments that cost a fortune instead of having space in a larger property for much lower costs. Sure consumables might get a bit more expensive (although it won't, most stuff is mass produced using robots now). But the big things in life, ie accomodation, will get cheaper

（回復(fù) @lembitmoislane.）人們不生孩子不是因為衣服太貴……而是因為他們被迫住在花費(fèi)不菲的狹小公寓里，而不是能以低得多的成本在更寬敞的房子里擁有空間。
當(dāng)然，消費(fèi)品可能會變得貴一點(diǎn)（盡管大概率不會，現(xiàn)在大多數(shù)東西都是用機(jī)器人大規(guī)模生產(chǎn)的）。
但生活中的大頭開銷，即住房，會變得更便宜。

@momo99123
?@kygo it absolutely is a huge deal, what about those that want to have children but cant cause of cost of living, what a crap situation to be in, causing severe human misery

（回復(fù) @kygo）這絕對是件大事。那些想生孩子但因為生活成本而不能生的人怎么辦？
這真是個糟糕的處境，造成了這么多嚴(yán)重的人間痛苦。

@Bandoolero
?@kygo property will not get cheaper, since rich people are buying it up

（回復(fù) @kygo）房產(chǎn)不會變便宜的，因為富人正在搶購。

@kygo
?@Bandoolero In a falling population, property demands go down, rents go down, property values will go down, it's simple economics. It's already happening in the rural areas in Japan.

（回復(fù) @Bandoolero）在人口下降的情況下，房產(chǎn)需求會下降，租金會下降，房產(chǎn)價值也會隨之下降，這是簡單的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)原理。這種情況在日本的農(nóng)村地區(qū)已經(jīng)發(fā)生了。

@Bandoolero
@kygo if the average wage population was driving up property prices, then your reasoning would be sound. Unfortunately, in today's age unequal society, average wage earners can't even buy homes, but wealthy individuals and investment funds buy these up by the thousands. They are the real culprit behind the price hikes.

（回復(fù) @kygo）如果平均工資水平的人口是推高房價的主力，那么你的推理就成立了。
不幸的是，在當(dāng)今這個不平等的社會，拿平均工資的人甚至買不起房，反而是富有的個人和投資基金在成千上萬地?fù)屬忂@些房產(chǎn)。
他們才是房價上漲的真正罪魁禍?zhǔn)住?br />
@cwood316
?@kygo it won't though. It will get more expensive. You will have a smaller workforce paying more tax to meet the needs of an aging population. Yes, houses will get cheaper in less urban areas but the workforce will consolidate more around major cities and therefore driving up property values in urban areas. Japan is a literal case study of this.
What is really needed is a small, sustainable population growth. Something that's impossible for any country to engineer.

（回復(fù) @kygo）但并不會（變便宜），反而會變得更貴。
你將面臨一個更小的勞動力群體，卻要支付更多的稅來滿足老齡化人口的需求。
是的，非城市地區(qū)的房價可能會變便宜，但勞動力會更多地向主要城市集中，從而推高城市地區(qū)的房產(chǎn)價值。
日本就是一個活生生的案例。
真正需要的是小規(guī)模、可持續(xù)的人口增長，而這是任何國家都無法人為設(shè)計出來的。

@anonymousman2521
?@kygo with declining population, production will also decline.

（回復(fù) @kygo）隨著人口下降，生產(chǎn)力也會下降。

@Chris-w9f
@kygo why would things get cheaper? As the population ages, income would actually get lower because more of your work is supporting the elderly

（回復(fù) @kygo）為什么物價會變便宜？隨著人口老齡化，（勞動人口的）收入實(shí)際上會降低，因為你更多的勞動成果是用來供養(yǎng)老年人了。

@DubberOne1
@kygo But the population doesn't really decline. They just import people from different cultures and erode their own slowly, but painfully. It's actually a big deal. Just look at europe.

（回復(fù) @kygo）但人口并沒真正下降。他們只是從不同文化背景的國家引進(jìn)人口，然后緩慢而痛苦地侵蝕自己的文化。
這實(shí)際上是件大事，看看歐洲就知道了。

@UpNorthCatsFan
@kygo not a big deal for you and me, but in capitalism eyes that’s a gigantic deal, if quotas can’t be hit the sky is falling. Or at least that’s it’s made out to feel like

（回復(fù) @kygo）對你我來說可能不是大事，但在資本主義的眼中，這可是天大的事。
如果（增長）指標(biāo)達(dá)不到，天就要塌下來了。
或者至少，它被塑造成了那種感覺。

@joyboyboy5149
@kygo lol you must be American..

（回復(fù) @kygo）哈哈，你肯定是美國人……

@juaquiqui-kun4333
@kygo me when I’m brain dead with no brain cells

（回復(fù) @kygo）這就是我大腦死亡、一個腦細(xì)胞都不剩時的樣子。

@bustoguf
?@kygo that's not how it works

（回復(fù) @kygo）事情不是那樣運(yùn)作的。

@marvin2678
@kygo that literally doesnt happen

（回復(fù) @kygo）那種情況根本不會發(fā)生。

@pa1agyemankwadwoafriyie895
@kygo That may not necessarily be so. Fewer people means few production, which can lead to a recession and if sustained, ultimately a depression and thats really really bad. Last time it happened the world needed a world war to bail it out

（回復(fù) @kygo）那不一定。人少意味著生產(chǎn)力下降，這可能導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退，如果持續(xù)下去，最終會導(dǎo)致大蕭條，那真的非常非常糟糕。上一次發(fā)生這種情況時，世界需要一場世界大戰(zhàn)來擺脫困境。

@klatonb
@kygo it takes 3 workers to fund one pensioners retired life

（回復(fù) @kygo）需要3個在職人員才能供養(yǎng)一個退休人員的退休生活。

@bokunogentoo4420
The problem is more that everyone's overworked. Both in Japan and China it's normal to be stuck doing 11 hour shifts, it's less that there's no money to start a family and more that there's no time to start one.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）問題更多在于每個人都過度勞累。
在日本和中國，每天工作11個小時是家常便飯。
與其說是沒錢組建家庭，不如說是根本沒時間。

@kairos_fluent
@bokunogentoo4420 But nations like Italy, Spain and Greece value leisure and are not overworked but they're in the same boat as Japan

（回復(fù) @bokunogentoo4420）但像意大利、西班牙和希臘這樣的國家很重視休閑，并不過度勞累，可他們跟日本還不是一樣面臨這個問題。

@markfreeman4727
@bokunogentoo4420 combination of both i think. Problems rarely come at you alone

（回復(fù) @bokunogentoo4420）我認(rèn)為是兩者兼而有之。問題很少會單獨(dú)出現(xiàn)。

@10secondsrule
@bokunogentoo4420 this is the key that’s overlooked by most.

（回復(fù) @bokunogentoo4420）這是大多數(shù)人都忽略了的關(guān)鍵。

@alo754
Kind of a self-correction by nature.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）某種程度上，這是大自然的自我修正。

@pjell
The old guy had it absolutely correct. If people have hope for the future, they have children. No hope means no children.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）那位老先生說得完全正確。
如果人們對未來抱有希望，他們就會生孩子；沒有希望，就意味著沒有孩子。

@mkkrupp2462
@pjell People might not be too worried the future if their main concern is how to live well in the present.

（回復(fù) @pjell）如果人們主要關(guān)心的是如何在當(dāng)下過得好，他們可能就不會太擔(dān)心未來。

@michaelrhodes73
Except for a 20-year window in 300,000 years of us being here, it has always been too expensive for all but a few to thrive.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）除了在我們存在于此的30萬年歷史長河中，有過一個短暫的20年窗口期，在其他所有時間里，對絕大多數(shù)人來說，“繁榮”一直都是過于昂貴的奢侈品。

@Hans_Unique_Handle
@michaelrhodes73 Difference being was that for those 300,000 years children were a net benefit to their parents as either workforce or carers. This meant having more children actually made you able to produce more and get taken care of when you got older. Nowadays children are a net cost for their parents as they only require resources and the benefit of being taken care of is obfuscated due to this being a collective thing (government pensions and healthcare).

（回復(fù) @michaelrhodes73）不同之處在于，在那30萬年里，孩子對父母來說是凈收益，他們既是勞動力，也是養(yǎng)老的依靠。
這意味著生更多的孩子，實(shí)際上能讓你創(chuàng)造更多價值，并在年老時得到照顧。
而如今，孩子對父母來說是凈成本，因為他們只消耗資源，而（父母）年老時被照顧的好處，因為變成了政府養(yǎng)老金和醫(yī)療保健這種集體承擔(dān)的事情，而被模糊化了。

@thenameisblu
?@michaelrhodes73 Not even then, really. But that's not really the most productive way at looking at things anyway. Is it bad to set goals?

（回復(fù) @michaelrhodes73）其實(shí)，即使在那個時候也不是。但無論如何，那都不是看待事物最有效的方式。設(shè)定目標(biāo)是壞事嗎？

@aliveandwell3958
@michaelrhodes73 Said by someone that doesn’t know how much it cost to live.

（回復(fù) @michaelrhodes73）這是一個不知道生活成本有多高的人說的話。

@Seriously-m1p
@michaelrhodes73
Along with “richer” comes a higher cost

（回復(fù) @michaelrhodes73）伴隨“更富?！倍鴣淼氖歉叩某杀尽?br />
@michaelrhodes73
Higher income is indirectly responsible for the low birth rates. The world has never been richer on average and birth rates have never been lower on average.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）更高的收入間接導(dǎo)致了低出生率。從平均水平來看，世界從未如此富裕，出生率也從未如此之低。

@offensivearch
@michaelrhodes73 Correlation isn't causation.

（回復(fù) @michaelrhodes73）相關(guān)性可不等于因果關(guān)系。

@michaelrhodes73
@offensivearch You cannot have causation when there isn't even correlation.

（回復(fù) @offensivearch）當(dāng)連相關(guān)性都沒有時，你更不可能有因果關(guān)系。

@theArun3435
Why economically poor countries have more children?

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）為什么經(jīng)濟(jì)貧困的國家孩子更多？

@seriousle-m1p
@theArun3435
Because they don’t have a 90 flat screen for entertainment.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）因為他們沒有90英寸的平板電視作為娛樂。

@mkkrupp2462
@theArun3435 The old culture persists. Also reliable contraception might be harder to obtain - geographically or expense wise.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）傳統(tǒng)的舊文化（殘余）依然存在。另外，可靠的避孕措施可能更難獲得——無論是地理上還是費(fèi)用上。

@manofyourdreams129
?@theArun3435 because they dont have the same requirements we have as parents. You can easily get your kid taken away and you have to check in the hospital to see if everything is all right. In poor countires they can sell their kids and not be arrested

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）因為他們沒有我們作為父母所面臨的同樣要求。
你（在發(fā)達(dá)國家）很容易就會因為各種原因被（福利機(jī)構(gòu)）帶走孩子，你必須去醫(yī)院檢查以確保一切正常。
而在貧窮國家，他們甚至可以賣掉自己的孩子而不會被逮捕。

@kelthuzad4634
@theArun3435 they are not taxed to death and also a lot of them are giving foreign aid

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）他們沒有被稅收壓得喘不過氣來，而且他們中的許多人還在接受外國援助。

@Seriously-m1p
@theArun3435
Because they don’t have a 90 flat screen for entertainment.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）因為他們沒有90英寸的平板電視作為娛樂。

@importantbaat
?@theArun3435 Because poor have not experienced a good life and trapped in traditions, society. In India also the rich have 1 or 2 kids only.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）因為窮人沒有體驗過好生活，并且被傳統(tǒng)和社會所束縛。
在印度，富人也只生1到2個孩子。

@kovy689
@theArun3435 Because of poor planning and education…

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）因為糟糕的規(guī)劃和教育……

@JayBee730
@theArun3435 less access to healthcare and education.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）更少的醫(yī)療保健和教育機(jī)會。

@leanordials8008
?@theArun3435, those people don't care about their children.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）那些人不關(guān)心他們的孩子。

@souslesbombes
Things are not "too expensive". People did not have iphones, did not travel by plane each year, did not go to the restaurant once a week 40 years ago. 

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）東西并非“太貴”啊。
40年前，人們沒有iPhone，不會每年乘飛機(jī)旅行，也不會每周去一次餐館。

@mkkrupp2462
@souslesbombes But younger people do not want to give up their iPhones , internet and subscxtion services, entertainment and occasional dining out. (Not to mention cars, health insurance, student debt repayments etc). And I don’t blame them. These things are embedded features of modern life. Who wants to go back to life 40 or more years ago? In any case, with the long working hours in Japan and China, young people hardly have time for the intensive work of child rearing.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）但是現(xiàn)在的年輕人不想放棄他們的iPhone、互聯(lián)網(wǎng)和各種訂閱服務(wù)、娛樂和偶爾外出就餐。（更不用說汽車、健康保險、學(xué)生貸款等了）。
我也不怪他們，這些東西是現(xiàn)代生活不可或缺的一部分。誰想回到40年或更久以前的生活？
無論如何，在日本和中國，工作時間那么長，年輕人幾乎沒有時間去從事?lián)狃B(yǎng)孩子這種耗費(fèi)精力的工作。

@JohnDoe-gc1pm
Crap that isnt important is cheap, compared to the essentials. Not buying 10 coffees could pay your rent. Now cutting coffee out barely makes a dent in rent. ?@souslesbombes

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）與生活必需品相比，那些不重要的垃圾東西是很便宜。
以前，不買10杯咖啡省下的錢可能就夠付房租了。
現(xiàn)在，戒掉咖啡對房租來說幾乎是杯水車薪。

@CupaTwiningS
?@souslesbombes 40 years ago, you made a living wage. And worked a 40 hr work week. On top of that we have spent the last 40 years telling people not to have kids unless you can afford them.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）40年前，你的工資能維持生活，而且每周只工作40小時。
最重要的是，過去40年里，我們一直在告訴人們，除非你養(yǎng)得起，否則就別生孩子。

@HarryFlashmanVC
?@souslesbombes This kind of “young people just buy iPhones” argument is lazy, out-of-touch, and frankly insulting.
Housing isn’t unaffordable because 30-year-olds are buying lattes it’s unaffordable because decades of bad policy inflated asset prices, restricted supply, and encouraged landlords to hoard homes as investments. You can skip every holiday and cook beans every night and still not afford a deposit in most UK cities.
Blaming young people for a collapsing birth rate while denying them economic security, affordable housing, and any sense of a hopeful future isn’t just hypocritical it’s gaslighting on a national scale.
We didn’t get here because of iPhones. We got here because the people in charge turned homes into hedge fund assets and then told the next generation it was their fault for not working hard enough.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）這種“年輕人只會買iPhone”的論調(diào)，既懶惰又脫離現(xiàn)實(shí)，坦率地說，還很侮辱人。
住房之所以變得難以負(fù)擔(dān)，不是因為30歲的人在買拿鐵咖啡，而是因為幾十年來糟糕的政策導(dǎo)致資產(chǎn)價格膨脹、供應(yīng)受限，并鼓勵房東將房屋作為投資品來囤積。
你可以放棄每個假期，每晚都只吃豆子，但在大多數(shù)英國城市，你依然付不起首付。
在剝奪年輕人的經(jīng)濟(jì)保障、可負(fù)擔(dān)的住房和任何對未來的希望感的同時，還將出生率崩潰歸咎于他們，這不僅是虛偽，更是全國范圍內(nèi)的精神操控。
我們走到今天這一步不是因為iPhone。
我們之所以如此，是因為當(dāng)權(quán)者把房子變成了對沖基金的資產(chǎn)，然后反過來告訴下一代，這是因為他們自己不夠努力。

@Seriously-m1p
@souslesbombes BOOOM! Truth bomb

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）砰！真相炸彈。

@Seriously-m1p
@souslesbombes the only thing you forgot is Starbucks for the incredibly expensive conspicuous consumption large latte every morning.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）你唯一忘了提的是星巴克，為了每天早上那杯貴得離譜、用于炫耀性消費(fèi)的大杯拿鐵。

@DK-cs2yl
@souslesbombes today’s economy vs 40 years ago.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）今天的經(jīng)濟(jì) vs 40年前。

@duketogo2616
?@souslesbombes Spoken like someone that hasn't looked at the cost of education, medicine, food, child care, transportation, or housing since the Reagan administration.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）說得好像你自從里根政府時代以來，就沒再看過教育、醫(yī)療、食品、托兒、交通或住房的成本一樣。

@asmodiusjones9563
@souslesbombes 40 years ago people could buy houses and live in them. Now, even on two incomes, the average person cannot buy a home.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）40年前人們可以買房子住在里面?，F(xiàn)在，即使有兩份收入，普通人也買不起房。

@EgotisticalDSO
That's part of it, but not the whole ballgame. Yes, money is tight and that has definitely had a negative effect on having children, but married couples have been having basically the same amount of kids they always have. The problem is that fewer people than ever have been getting married, and this issue has a surprising culprit: the smartphone. Recent studies have found that smartphones have been helping fuel political polarization, which affects men and women differently- men becoming more conservative and women becoming more liberal. This has had an extremely negative effect on relationship formation, and consequently marriages, which in turn has resulted in an extremely negative effect on population growth. Banning the smartphone would almost certainly have a greater effect on population decline than implementing a UBI.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）那是其中一部分，但不是全部。是的，錢很緊張，那確實(shí)對生孩子產(chǎn)生了負(fù)面影響，但已婚夫婦生的孩子數(shù)量基本上和以前一樣。
問題在于結(jié)婚的人比以往任何時候都少，而這個問題有一個令人驚訝的罪魁禍?zhǔn)祝褐悄苁謾C(jī)。
最近的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，智能手機(jī)助長了政治兩極分化，這對男性和女性的影響不同——男性變得更保守，女性變得更自由。
這對關(guān)系形成產(chǎn)生了極其負(fù)面的影響，從而影響了婚姻，進(jìn)而對人口增長產(chǎn)生了極其負(fù)面的影響。
禁止智能手機(jī)對人口下降的影響幾乎肯定比實(shí)施全民基本收入要大。

@offensivearch
There is no fertility crisis in Taliban controlled Afghanistan. If you make Afghanistan rich, their fertility rate may go down but it won't go down below replacement.
Do you think it's harder to survive in America or Afghanistan? This isn't an economic issue, it's a cultural one.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）在塔利班控制的阿富汗沒有生育危機(jī)。
如果你讓阿富汗富裕起來，他們的生育率可能會下降，但不會降到更替水平以下。
你認(rèn)為在美國還是阿富汗生存更難？
這不是經(jīng)濟(jì)問題，是文化問題。

@sabsain2399
?@offensivearch can you explain how exactly it's harder for the average person in Afghanistan to survive than one in the US?

（回復(fù) @offensivearch）你能確切解釋一下阿富汗的普通人比美國的普通人生存更難在哪些方面嗎？

@Retotion
It’s not radical, it’s a common and very wrong idea. People now are richer than at any point in human history, there has never been a more affordable time to have children. People just don’t want them.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）這不激進(jìn)，這是一個普遍且非常錯誤的想法。
現(xiàn)在的人比人類歷史上任何時候都富有，從未有過比現(xiàn)在更負(fù)擔(dān)得起生孩子的時候。
人們只是不想要孩子。

@roberthiggins8234
this isnt true though. Its not more expensive to 'live' now days. Its just that we have so much more options when it comes to spending our money.
Holidays are cheaper, entertainment is cheaper, cars are cheaper, clothe are cheaper. Houses are more expensive...which isnt a problem on its own, but the fact is people are now choosing the holiday/entertainment/cars/clothe/other cheap 'crap' instead of the house.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）不過這不正確?，F(xiàn)在“生活”并不更貴。只是我們在花錢方面有了更多的選擇。
假期更便宜了，娛樂更便宜了，汽車更便宜了，衣服更便宜了。房子更貴了……
這本身不是問題，但事實(shí)是人們現(xiàn)在選擇假期/娛樂/汽車/衣服/其他便宜的“垃圾”，而不是房子。

@roberthiggins8234
@theArun3435 This is a great point. Its not 'too expensive' that everyone keeps bringing up. Its that alternatives to a family are much cheaper. That is there is an actual 'alternative' lifestyle to having children that is exciting/fun/potentially fulfilling. Holiday/partying etc etc is so cheap compared to starting a family/buying a house/being responsible. So people are choosing the easier more exciting lifestyle.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）這是一個很好的觀點(diǎn)。問題不在于每個人都在提的“太貴了”，而在于家庭生活之外的替代選擇要便宜得多。
也就是說，除了生孩子，還有一種實(shí)際的“替代”生活方式，那是令人興奮、有趣、且可能充實(shí)的。
與組建家庭、買房、承擔(dān)責(zé)任相比，度假、聚會等等實(shí)在是太便宜了。
所以人們選擇了更輕松、更刺激的生活方式。

@DhaadaneBuuni-b2s
@theArun3435 You are getting closer to understanding the root of the problem, which is that people have become selfish and are not willing to make sacrifices.

（回復(fù) @theArun3435）你正在接近理解問題的根源，那就是人們變得自私，不愿意做出犧牲。

@nieko3038
@whiteberry8785 There were more generations than the boomers lol.
People used to have a lot of children so when some didn’t make it there were other children to take care of their parents when they got old.
Here in the Netherlands there were houses made of dirt end of 19th century.
World didn’t start after 1945.

（回復(fù) @whiteberry8785）除了嬰兒潮一代，歷史上還有更多代人呢，哈哈。
以前人們生很多孩子，所以當(dāng)一些孩子沒能活下來時，還有其他孩子能在他們年老時照顧他們。
在荷蘭這里，19世紀(jì)末還有泥土造的房子。
世界不是從1945年后才開始的。

@brodeize
Japan has an average of 26 hours working week. Why you lying ?

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）日本平均每周工作26小時。你為什么撒謊？

@KWG-001
@brodeize Way to look at a number and not think about why it is that low.
This number factors in part-time employment and gig employment. Full-time workers in Japan are only just now trying to fix the over-working culture of their nation. Also those part-timers often work multiple jobs which lowers that number even more as they don't factor in a person's time spent each day working, only the hours worked at each shift.

（回復(fù) @brodeize）你這是只看數(shù)字，卻不去思考為什么它那么低。
這個數(shù)字把兼職和零工都算了進(jìn)去。
日本的全職工人現(xiàn)在才剛剛開始嘗試糾正他們國家那種過度工作的文化。
而且那些兼職者通常打好幾份工，這進(jìn)一步拉低了那個平均數(shù)，因為統(tǒng)計時不計算一個人每天總共工作了多長時間，只計算每份工作的工時。

@YaSunny0409
Besides high living cost that discourages young people from having children, there is also a culture change. When the culture was to have many kids, even poor people living in mud house had many children. Now young people don’t want to have kids in undesirable conditions and/or lower their own living standards and fun time to raise kids.
Meanwhile, no need to having kids as retirement plan greatly reduced the need to have kids.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）除了高昂的生活成本阻礙年輕人要孩子，還有文化上的變遷。當(dāng)主流文化是多子多福時，即使是住在土坯房里的窮人也會生很多孩子。
而現(xiàn)在，年輕人不愿在不理想的條件下生育，和/或為了撫養(yǎng)孩子而降低自己的生活水平、犧牲自己的娛樂時間。
與此同時，不再需要“養(yǎng)兒防老”，也大大降低了生孩子的必要性。

@dreamcatcher75418
It’s hard to raise children in a duel income household.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）在雙收入家庭中撫養(yǎng)孩子很困難。

@foyfy9visogicjtzhoiuxhtf
I dont think its more affordable in somalia afghanistan like countries

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）我不認(rèn)為在索馬里、阿富汗這樣的國家生活更負(fù)擔(dān)得起。

@Sothisishowitis
It seems there is a correlation between credit culture vs beliefs & values. How those effect population I don't exactly know.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）似乎在信貸文化與信仰和價值觀之間存在某種關(guān)聯(lián)。至于它們究竟如何影響人口，我不太清楚。

@dajusta87
Wealthy people have less kids than poor people do. Historically, it's been like that. Affordability isn't the problem.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）富人比窮人的孩子少。從歷史上看，一直如此。問題不在于負(fù)擔(dān)能力。

@markfreeman4727
poor people have more kids hoping at least one of them survives to adult hood

（回復(fù) @dajusta87）窮人生更多孩子是希望至少有一個能活到成年。

@bluz1864
I can only speak for myself but I remember growing up and being told not to have kids if I can't afford to have them.
Well, I'm now 31 and only now considering having a child because money is finally "okay" (not good but okay)

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）我只能代表我自己說話，但我記得我從小就被告知如果養(yǎng)不起就不要生孩子。
嗯，我現(xiàn)在31歲了，直到現(xiàn)在才考慮要孩子，因為錢終于“還行”了（不是很好但還行）。

@geofflewis8599
key issue is the cost of housing. my view is that the Govt should provide an apartment for free for married couples between the ages of 18 and 38yrs, without criminal records. These couples can not sell these apartments for 10 years. In return they can not claim superannuation.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）關(guān)鍵問題是住房成本。我的觀點(diǎn)是，政府應(yīng)該為18至38歲之間、無犯罪記錄的已婚夫婦免費(fèi)提供一套公寓。
這些夫婦在10年內(nèi)不能出售這些公寓。
作為回報，他們不能領(lǐng)取養(yǎng)老金。

@ArtificialGamingIntelligence
The data shows the exact opposite conclusion. Both between and within countries, birth rates are heavily inversely correlated with disposable income and wealth.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）數(shù)據(jù)顯示出完全相反的結(jié)論。
無論是在國家之間還是在國家內(nèi)部，出生率都與可支配收入和財富呈顯著的負(fù)相關(guān)。

@feldspar230
Fertility (or really lack thereof) is correlated with education level. Income is not. The real issue is the dramatic reduction in the number of women with only a high education or less, as they have historically had the most babies. 30+ year old career women have as many babies today as they did 30 years ago. but they're a lot more of them now than before. This is a triumph for women's liberation of course. But the impact on fertility is a problem at an aggregate, population level.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）生育率（或者說缺乏生育率）與教育水平相關(guān)，與收入無關(guān)。
真正的問題是僅有高中或更低學(xué)歷的女性數(shù)量急劇減少，而她們在歷史上生的孩子最多。
30多歲的職業(yè)女性今天生的孩子和30年前一樣多，但現(xiàn)在她們的人數(shù)比以前多得多。
這當(dāng)然是女性解放的勝利。
但在總體人口層面上，對生育率的影響是一個問題。

@Nnnoorssz
One kid option should still be there...atleast...if not 2.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）至少應(yīng)該還有一個孩子的選項……如果不能有兩個的話。

@chrisburn7178
??@souslesbombes Missed the point. It's not the iPhones, it's basic necessaries like a house, or childcare. The cost of rents or mortgages relative to income far, far outstrips levels that the boomer generation had. Nobody spends most of their income each month on an iPhone, yet most people end up doing just that on their rent.

（回復(fù) @souslesbombes）沒抓住重點(diǎn)。不是iPhone的問題，是像房子或托兒這樣的基本必需品。
相對于收入的租金或抵押貸款成本，遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了嬰兒潮一代的水平。
沒有人每個月把大部分收入花在iPhone上，但大多數(shù)人最終卻在房租上這么做了。

@stephanfouche9208
This is only partially correct. The heart of the problem is how modern culture interacts with female nature. Women tend to pick partners based on status. Women will generally not pick a man that is lower in status, so lower income or less attractive or shorter or whatever. As women earn more in a modern society the number of eligible partners decrease from a female dating perspective

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）這只部分正確。問題的核心在于現(xiàn)代文化如何與女性天性互動。女性傾向于根據(jù)地位挑選伴侶。女性通常不會選擇地位較低的男性，比如收入較低、吸引力較小、較矮等等。隨著女性在現(xiàn)代社會中收入增加，從女性約會的角度看，合格伴侶的數(shù)量會減少。

@Nnnoorssz
@stephanfouche9208
Thats not true..everyone s not gold digger..men are not seeious

（回復(fù) @stephanfouche9208）那不正確……不是每個人都是拜金女……是男人不認(rèn)真。

@stephanfouche9208
@Nnnoorssz I didn't even mention "gold digging" brightspark. My comment was referring to the observable trend of women dating "up" so to speak. As women become more financially successful their dating pool shrinks, it's not rocket science

（回復(fù) @Nnnoorssz）我甚至沒提“拜金”……
我的評論指的是女性“向上”約會的明顯趨勢。
隨著女性在經(jīng)濟(jì)上越來越成功，她們的約會對象范圍會縮小，這不是什么高深的科學(xué)。

@hemantsarthak
?@lifeinhd4053 i dont think so, like companies the end of the day still need people and this incentives the people that even if they don't have a job, they should still get married to improve their job prospects like job is aspect because money is needed to take care etc housing etc if you already have those then marrying and kids become less risky, and instead become a bonus for more jobs.

（回復(fù) @lifeinhd4053）我不這么認(rèn)為，比如公司歸根結(jié)底還是需要人，這激勵了人們即使沒有工作，也應(yīng)該結(jié)婚以改善他們的工作前景，因為工作是一個方面，因為需要錢來照顧家庭、住房等，如果你已經(jīng)有了這些，那么結(jié)婚生子風(fēng)險就變小了，反而成為獲得更多工作的加分項。

@kookthekid8338
This is completely wrong, people have never had more money and better lives, especially in places with extremely low birth rates. It’s actually proven that as quality of life increases, the birth rate decreases. The reason people don’t have kids is because in these societies, birth control is more available, there’s more to life besides working and raising a family, and the style of the work day has completely changed. You don’t want 20 kids to work on your farm now, because you live in an apartment working a corporate job and go out drinking every few days.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）這完全是錯的，人們從未有過更多的錢和更好的生活，尤其是在出生率極低的地方。
實(shí)際上已經(jīng)證明，隨著生活質(zhì)量的提高，出生率會下降。
人們不要孩子的原因是，在這些社會中，避孕措施更容易獲得，除了工作和養(yǎng)家之外，生活還有更多內(nèi)容，而且工作日的風(fēng)格也完全改變了。
你現(xiàn)在不想要20個孩子在你的農(nóng)場工作，因為你住在公寓里，做著公司的工作，每隔幾天就出去喝酒。

@Francis-f4f
"It's almost like there's this radical idea that if it gets too expensive to literally live, maybe just maybe, it's not affordable to grow a family. " It's perfectly affordable to grow a family, if couple in Niger can afford to have up to 7 children I am pretty sure that in Japan couples they can afford to have 2.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）“這幾乎就像有一個激進(jìn)的想法，如果生活本身變得太昂貴，也許，只是也許，養(yǎng)家糊口就負(fù)擔(dān)不起了。”
養(yǎng)家糊口是完全負(fù)擔(dān)得起的，如果尼日爾的夫婦能負(fù)擔(dān)得起生多達(dá)7個孩子，我很確定在日本的夫婦他們能負(fù)擔(dān)得起生2個。

@EricShingles-p6q
?@Francis-f4f no, it's no where near the same

（回復(fù) @Francis-f4f）不，這根本不一樣。

@Francis-f4f
@EricShingles-p6q This is not a rebuttal of my point although you are right when you say " it's no where near the same" in the sense that couples in Japan have it a lot better which only serves to further prove my point.

（回復(fù) @EricShingles-p6q）這并未反駁我的觀點(diǎn)，盡管你說“根本不一樣”是對的，意思是日本的夫婦過得好得多，這恰恰進(jìn)一步證明了我的觀點(diǎn)。

@MrMorlow
?@kygo that's wishful thinking. More Than enough economists have debunked that idea already.

（回復(fù) @kygo）那是一廂情愿。已經(jīng)有足夠多的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家揭穿了那個想法。

@blacksaiyan64
?@AnOnlineDweller so what?

（回復(fù) @AnOnlineDweller）那又怎樣？

@gothicgolem2947
Except poor countries often have big birth rates

除了貧窮國家通常出生率很高。

@pa1agyemankwadwoafriyie895
@kygo That may not necessarily be so. Fewer people means few production, which can lead to a recession and if sustained, ultimately a depression and thats really really bad. Last time it happened the world needed a world war to bail it out

（回復(fù) @kygo）那不一定。人少意味著生產(chǎn)少，這可能導(dǎo)致衰退，如果持續(xù)下去，最終會導(dǎo)致蕭條，那真的非常非常糟糕。上次發(fā)生這種情況時，世界需要一場世界大戰(zhàn)來解救。

@6lue5kies
This is one of the main reasons why I'm nearly 40 and still haven't gotten married and had children even though I've longed for a stable marriage and to give everything for a couple children to experience the entire rearing phase of a normal adult life. The whole world needs to switch back to this or we're in for a whole lot of hurt.

這是我年近40歲仍未結(jié)婚生子的主要原因之一，盡管我一直渴望穩(wěn)定的婚姻，并為一兩個孩子付出一切，讓他們體驗正常成年生活的整個撫養(yǎng)階段。
整個世界都需要回到這種狀態(tài)，否則我們將遭受巨大的痛苦。

@thedorkone1516
Not to mention how absolutely INSANE Japan's work culture is. It's a little hard to FIND someone to marry and have children with if you never have time for anything but working.

更不用說日本的工作文化是多么的瘋狂。
如果你除了工作什么時間都沒有，那就很難找到人結(jié)婚生子。

@kyle6781
I think we could almost call it afact that a 19-22yr old today male or female are much less mature than past generations have been.. and actually id say its due to theae dam phones and social media... we legitimately have women ages 25-40 doijg cringey poses on instagram for the sole purpose that strangers, COMPLETE STRANGERS hit the like button or comment on their post to validate what they think about themselves. Im 34yrs old, i look around in real life and online and noticed all the "men" from 18-25ish act like teenagers. Me and everyone i knew at those ages didnt act like teenagers. When i was 23 i wasnt going around doing dumb pranks on people, we did that whej we were 15.. there are so many examples, or maybe i truelt am getting old but what i see from these young adults is scary. They act like how we did when we were teenagers. And look at alot of people ad their kids, they dont want to parent, they want a lil mimi me to be their bestfriends and so their parenting sucks. I could be totaly wrong, i dont think i am though?

我想我們幾乎可以稱之為一個事實(shí)，即今天19-22歲的男性或女性比過去幾代人要不成熟得多……
實(shí)際上我會說這是因為這些該死的手機(jī)和社交媒體……
我們確實(shí)有25-40歲的女性在Instagram上擺出尷尬的姿勢，其唯一目的就是讓陌生人，完全的陌生人，點(diǎn)贊或評論她們的帖子，以驗證她們對自己的看法。
我34歲了，我在現(xiàn)實(shí)生活和網(wǎng)絡(luò)上環(huán)顧四周，注意到所有18-25歲左右的“男人”都像青少年一樣行事。
我和我認(rèn)識的那些年齡段的人都不像青少年那樣行事。
我23歲時，我不會到處對人搞愚蠢的惡作劇，我們15歲時才那么做……
有很多例子，或者也許我真的老了，但我從這些年輕人身上看到的東西很可怕。
他們的行為就像我們青少年時期的樣子。再看看很多人和他們的孩子，他們不想當(dāng)父母，他們想要一個小小的迷你版自己當(dāng)他們最好的朋友，所以他們的育兒方式很糟糕。
我可能完全錯了吧，但我不這么認(rèn)為。

@kimmogensen4888
The climate change policy's which the video tries to remind you about is very important for the media is on of the reson for the high cost of living, and 25 years ago the end of the world was population growth maybe if we stop with the alarmist thinking and start to give young people more help and a chance to get a good job instead of favoring older people, I don't know the reason why they have high housing prices in Japan they must not have built enough homes or they have been doing very bad urbane planing, in many badly governd western countries high housing cost is often mostly because of huge migration but Japan doesn't have that, moving education, business, government institutions away from large cities is and decentralization, Denmark support families massively economicly and time to take care of the children, it's seems like a lot of country's are not even trying to change it

視頻試圖提醒你的氣候變化政策，對媒體來說非常重要，是高生活成本的原因之一。
25年前，“世界末日”的論調(diào)是人口增長，也許如果我們停止這種危言聳聽的想法，開始給年輕人更多幫助和獲得好工作的機(jī)會，而不是偏袒老年人（情況會好些）。
我不知道為什么日本的房價那么高，他們一定是沒有建足夠的房子，或者他們的城市規(guī)劃做得非常糟糕。
在許多治理不善的西方國家，高昂的住房成本通常主要是因為大規(guī)模移民，但日本沒有這個問題。
將教育、商業(yè)、政府機(jī)構(gòu)遷出大城市是去中心化的做法。
丹麥在經(jīng)濟(jì)上大力支持家庭，并給予時間照顧孩子。
似乎很多國家甚至沒有嘗試去改變它。

@rabidlorax1650
that doesnt check out though when cost of living is quite low in Japan compared to other developed countries that have higher birth rates, also well to do Japanese people are not having enough kids either.

不過這說不通，因為與出生率較高的其他發(fā)達(dá)國家相比，日本的生活成本相當(dāng)?shù)?，而且富裕的日本人也沒有生足夠多的孩子。

@CorneliusTaylor-s1u
It's not really a matter of cost. Many young people today don't wanna have children nor get married.

這其實(shí)不是成本問題。如今許多年輕人既不想要孩子也不想結(jié)婚。

@sternleiche
It is a time issue

這是個時間問題。

@0verride881
It's almost as if there's this radical idea that bringing women into the workforce was the dumbest idea every country that got rich did. This isn't rocket science.
Children aren't expensive, women with an opinion are .

這幾乎就像有一個激進(jìn)的想法，讓女性進(jìn)入勞動力市場是每個富裕國家所做的最愚蠢的想法。這不是什么高深的科學(xué)。
孩子不貴，有主見的女人才貴。

@CB-sf9mx
Its more than that. the cost of living in japan is incredibly low compared to UK or US

不僅如此。與英國或美國相比，日本的生活成本非常低。

@dennisjajablubb9984
I dont think that its that easy. You have to take into account the long hours they work and that it is expected that both parents work (like in many 1st world countrys), so it seems impossible to have time for kids. Also it gets harder to meet people, because many reasons (internet usage, the work hours etc.). Another reason seems to be that people are fed up by capitalism, they draw their life fullfilment from consuming and the overall availability of things to invenst your time in, more than starting a family (maybe one reason is its because its easier.... idk). Money plays a big role thats true but its not the only reason, you can raise a family with little money as most generations before us had to do. I think its only an excuse to blame it all on money. How we set our priorities is a big reason too.

（回復(fù) @CB-sf9mx）我不認(rèn)為有那么容易。你必須考慮到他們工作的長時間，并且期望父母雙方都工作（像許多第一世界國家一樣），所以似乎不可能有時間要孩子。
而且，因為很多原因（互聯(lián)網(wǎng)使用、工作時間等），也越來越難遇到人。
另一個原因似乎是人們對資本主義感到厭倦，他們從消費(fèi)和可以投入時間的各種事物的可獲得性中獲得生活滿足感，而不是組建家庭（也許一個原因是這更容易……我不知道）。
錢確實(shí)扮演了重要角色，但不是唯一原因，你可以用很少的錢養(yǎng)家，就像我們之前的大多數(shù)代人必須做的那樣。
我認(rèn)為把一切都?xì)w咎于錢只是個借口。
我們?nèi)绾卧O(shè)定我們的優(yōu)先事項也是一個重要原因。

@CB-sf9mx
@dennisjajablubb9984 This. No time for proper socialising. Long working hours. Tiny apartments with no space for having friends over. 1 million and 1 distractions after you get home from work. the list goes on. It certainly isnt just about cost of living.

（回復(fù) @dennisjajablubb9984）就是這個。
沒有時間進(jìn)行適當(dāng)?shù)纳缃?、工作時間長、小公寓沒有空間招待朋友、下班回家后有100萬零1個分心的事情……清單還在繼續(xù)。這肯定不僅僅是生活成本的問題。

@Yesman1001
This is so dump. Poor people make more kids. It has never been about money. But the new society favours individualism over Communism.

（回復(fù) @CB-sf9mx）這太蠢了。窮人生更多孩子。這從來都不是錢的問題。而是新的社會風(fēng)氣就是更偏愛個人主義而非集體主義。

@dennisjajablubb9984
@Yesman1001 yeah, people are fed up with their own lifes. There is no room for a family.

（回復(fù) @Yesman1001）是的，人們對自己的生活感到厭倦。沒有家庭的空間。

@roberttrisca8210
or maybe people are too greedy ?! too concerned with status ?

（回復(fù) @CB-sf9mx）或者也許是人們太貪婪了？！太在意地位了？

@churblefurbles
Its density, the more apartments they build the worse it will get, but as long as the borders remain it will self correct itself.

（回復(fù) @itmeboh）是密度，他們建的公寓越多，情況就越糟，但只要邊界保持不變，它就會自我修正。

@Leona-pc9cf
Why are women barely mentioned in this? It seems to me that the way women feel about having children is key here. Too long have women had children because of what society thought they should do with their bodies. Physically bearing a child needs to be recognised as the bodily sacrifice that it is. The sacrifice to career. The sacrifice to mental health, if you are not being well supported by a partner and a family.

為什么這里幾乎沒有提到女性？
在我看來，女性對生孩子的感受才是這里的關(guān)鍵。
長久以來，女性生孩子僅僅是因為社會認(rèn)為她們應(yīng)該如何對待自己的身體。
我們必須認(rèn)識到，生育本身就是一種身體上的巨大犧牲，是對事業(yè)的犧牲，如果你沒有得到伴侶和家庭的良好支持，那更是對心理健康的犧牲。

@ninamatthews8747
Problem in Japan is the same problem everywhere. Young people don’t want to have kids because they don’t feel financially secure. The rich are hoarding resources and it’s causing downward negative effects.

日本的問題放到哪兒都一樣。年輕人不想要孩子，是因為他們沒有經(jīng)濟(jì)上的安全感。
富人正在囤積資源，這正在造成一系列負(fù)面的連鎖反應(yīng)。

@ecclairmayo4153
It's very stressful to have kids and money is just one of the stressors

（回復(fù) @ninamatthews8747）生孩子壓力很大，而錢只是眾多壓力源中的一個。

@MrAerohank
I see a lot of people around me in their 30s who are financially secure but don't have kids.
Life in the first world is good. Very good. And it's fun. Luxury goods and trips are cheap and accessible for many young people. As a result, these young people choose to enjoy the fun and luxuries instead of choosing to have children. Having children has become a sacrifice. A sacrifice of your personal free time and fun.

（回復(fù) @ninamatthews8747）我看到我周圍很多30多歲的人經(jīng)濟(jì)上很穩(wěn)定，但也沒有孩子。
在第一世界國家的生活很好，非常好，而且很有趣。
奢侈品和旅行對許多年輕人來說既便宜又觸手可及。
因此，這些年輕人選擇享受樂趣和奢侈，而不是選擇生孩子。
生孩子已經(jīng)成了一種犧牲——犧牲你個人的自由時間和樂趣。

@anadd6195
True

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）確實(shí)。

@marvin2678
money isnt the problem

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）錢不是問題。

@brmbkl
@MrAerohank "I see a lot of people around me in their 30s who are financially secure but don't have kids."
anecdotal evidence, only says something about your social circle
and maybe the people you know are afraid that the only way to maintain their economic status is to remain childless?
that the examples they see of people with kids are not appealing, points to a fear, not selfishness
maybe enquire those friends of your to their motivation?

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）“我看到我周圍很多30多歲的人經(jīng)濟(jì)上很穩(wěn)定，但沒有孩子。”
——這是孤證，只能說明你社交圈子的情況。
而且，也許你認(rèn)識的人是害怕維持他們經(jīng)濟(jì)地位的唯一方法就是不生孩子？
他們看到的那些有孩子的家庭生活并不吸引人，這指向一種恐懼，而不是自私。
或許你可以去問問你那些朋友，他們不生的動機(jī)到底是什么？

@anthonyml7
So high cost of living, is what I think you're trying to say, I agree.

（回復(fù) @brmbkl）所以是高昂的生活成本，我想你是想這么說，我同意。

@jansean2497
@MrAerohank Nice try. Try unaffordable housing, healthcare and being endlessly indentured to student loans.

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）說得好聽。你再試試負(fù)擔(dān)不起的住房、醫(yī)療保健和還不完的學(xué)生貸款吧。

@anthonyml7
@MrAerohank Bingo, it's much more of a "me me me" mentality which is why marriage rates have gone down and that pairs up with birth rates since the reason people get marries at all is usually to start a family.

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）答對了。這更多是一種“我、我、我”的個人主義心態(tài)，這就是為什么結(jié)婚率下降了，而這又直接與出生率掛鉤，因為人們結(jié)婚的原因通常就是為了組建家庭。

@ilovecheesecake9904
@anthonyml7 Having children is always a sacrifice, the youth is choosing to focus on themselves before starting a family, which is a lot smarter than just doing it blindly because of tradition.

（回復(fù) @anthonyml7）生孩子總是一種犧牲。
年輕人選擇在組建家庭前先關(guān)注自身，這比僅僅因為傳統(tǒng)而盲目地去做，要聰明得多。

@jansean2497
There! You said it best!

（回復(fù) @ilovecheesecake9904）對了就是這樣！你說得最好！

@agnyte22
@brmbkl this changes when you have kids… you are out of work, juggling many different aspects that no longer has anything to do with you. One parent is left to support family, other must dedicate his/her time to raise good humans, well mannered this requires time and money.

（回復(fù) @brmbkl）當(dāng)你有了孩子，一切就都變了……你沒法工作，要處理許多不再只與你個人相關(guān)的方方面面。
一個家長要養(yǎng)家，另一個必須投入他/她的時間來培養(yǎng)有教養(yǎng)的好孩子，而這需要大量的時間和金錢。

@UzumakiNaruto_
@MrAerohank Life in the first world is good. Very good. And it's fun. Luxury goods and trips are cheap and accessible for many young people. As a result, these young people choose to enjoy the fun and luxuries instead of choosing to have children. Having children has become a sacrifice. A sacrifice of your personal free time and fun.
This is definitely the co-main reason as to why modern, civilized nations have fewer kids. Not only because of affordability of raising one or more children, but also if you're living a nice comfortable life, do you really want to put that on the back burner for many years to raise kids?
Many are willing to do that, but many more aren't and simply want to enjoy their own lives rather than spend close to 15-20 years or more raising children.

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）在第一世界的生活很好，非常好，而且很有趣。
奢侈品和旅行對許多年輕人來說既便宜又容易獲得。
因此，這些年輕人選擇享受樂趣和奢侈，而不是選擇生孩子。生孩子已經(jīng)成了一種犧牲。犧牲你個人的自由時間和樂趣。
這絕對是現(xiàn)代文明國家孩子少的共同主要原因之一。
不僅是因為撫養(yǎng)一個或多個孩子的經(jīng)濟(jì)負(fù)擔(dān)，也因為如果你正過著美好舒適的生活，你真的愿意為了撫養(yǎng)孩子而將其擱置多年嗎？
許多人愿意這樣做，但更多的人不愿意，他們只是想享受自己的生活，而不是花近15-20年甚至更長時間來撫養(yǎng)孩子。

@enock83
It’s really that simple.

（回復(fù) @UzumakiNaruto_）真的就這么簡單。

@SenEmChannel
@MrAerohank i'm 32 and i'm not finacially secure nor my peers. I dont know, maybe your is difference

（回復(fù) @MrAerohank）我32歲了，我和我的同齡人在經(jīng)濟(jì)上都不穩(wěn)定。我不知道，也許你的情況不同。

@SenEmChannel
@anthonyml7 i have to want family, but i cant afford it.

（回復(fù) @anthonyml7）我想要家庭，但我負(fù)擔(dān)不起。

@Harishcn82
Indian population on the other hand is seeing an explosive growth with no sight of coning down

（回復(fù) @ninamatthews8747）另一方面，印度人口正在爆炸式增長，絲毫沒有下降的跡象。

@rclooper2843
Funny that data shows the opposite. The higher amount of disposable income the lower the birth rate. It is not a money problem as much as a lot of people want to keep saying it is.

（回復(fù) @ninamatthews8747）有趣的是，數(shù)據(jù)顯示的恰恰相反。可支配收入越高，出生率越低。這不是錢的問題，盡管很多人總想這么說。

@SenEmChannel
@rclooper2843 if the higher money mean the lower the birth rate. Then it is sure the money is a problem. My hypothesis is: in rich country, money to raise kid with higher education, better health, and better house is extremely higher than poor country. House is also more expensive. But in poor country, house is very cheap, and people dont care about their kid education or health. So in poor coutry, raise a child is significant cheaper than rich country. Let say: poor country go quantity of the children, rich country go for quality of the children. It make sense, because my parent could bought a house back then with 1 years of salary, that is insane.

（回復(fù) @rclooper2843）如果錢越多意味著出生率越低，那么錢肯定是個問題。
我的假設(shè)是：在富裕國家，用更高的教育、更好的醫(yī)療和更好的房子來撫養(yǎng)孩子的成本，比貧窮國家高得多，房子也更貴。
但在貧窮國家，房子非常便宜，人們也不在乎他們孩子的教育或健康。
所以在貧窮國家，撫養(yǎng)一個孩子比在富裕國家便宜得多。
可以說：窮國追求孩子的數(shù)量，富國追求孩子的質(zhì)量。
這說得通，因為我的父母當(dāng)時用一年的薪水就能買一套房子，那太瘋狂了。

@Koshersquid
It's more that children and marriage have changed from being necessary and expected to unnecessary in the case of marriage and a huge expense in the case of children. The birthrate is way higher in impoverished countries because people rely on marriage for financial security and children to care for them in their old age.

（回復(fù) @ninamatthews8747）更重要的是，孩子和婚姻的觀念已經(jīng)改變了：從曾經(jīng)的必要和理所應(yīng)當(dāng)，變成了婚姻非必要、孩子則是一筆巨大的開銷。
貧困國家的出生率要高得多，因為人們依靠婚姻來獲得經(jīng)濟(jì)保障，依靠孩子來為自己養(yǎng)老。

@420cm
The wolves confused why the sheep are not breeding anymore

狼群感到困惑：為什么羊群不再繁殖了？

@jimhendericks
Wong analogy. Slave masters don't need slaves anymore cause of ai.

（回復(fù) @420cm）錯誤的類比。因為有了人工智能，奴隸主已經(jīng)不再需要奴隸了。

@arvinsim
@jimhendericks AI ain't gonna replace labor intensive jobs like construction, nursing, etc.

（回復(fù) @jimhendericks）人工智能可取代不了像建筑、護(hù)理等勞動密集型工作。

@Kevin_40
A 2 year old can figure this out. Stop ripping off young adults. Young adults need to be able to afford a normal life. In Japan everything is too expensive and now its happening around the world. Young adults are being massively ripped off and taken advantage of which leads men especially to not want to have children!

一個2歲的孩子都能想明白。
停止剝削年輕人吧！年輕人需要能夠負(fù)擔(dān)得起正常的生活。
在日本，所有東西都太貴了，現(xiàn)在全世界都在發(fā)生這種情況。
年輕人正在被大規(guī)模地剝削和利用，這尤其導(dǎo)致了男性不想要孩子！

@dazzlepecs
so explain the poorest countries having the highest fertility rate?

（回復(fù) @Kevin_40）那解釋一下為什么最貧窮的國家生育率最高？

@lynnmckenney1987
Its wild that "lets ensure our citizens feel financially stable enough to have kids" was never prioritized by the governenment...as it watched this happen for..THIRTY YEARS???!?

真是瘋狂，“讓我們確保我們的公民在經(jīng)濟(jì)上足夠穩(wěn)定，從而能生得起孩子”這件事，政府從來沒有優(yōu)先考慮過……就這么眼睜睜地看著這種情況發(fā)生了……三十年？？？??？

@SedriqMiers
Japan's economy is run by the U.S they have no say in the matter. The price of surrender in WW2, its basically another U.S state but without any U.S citizenry protections.

（回復(fù) @lynnmckenney1987）日本的經(jīng)濟(jì)是由美國掌控的，他們在這件事上沒有發(fā)言權(quán)，這是二戰(zhàn)投降的代價。
它基本上就是美國的另一個州，但沒有任何美國公民享有的保護(hù)。

@dylanshane
Crazy to think Japan got so ahead of the world in tech, economy, and culture — but now they’re literally running out of people. It’s like they hit a “cultural maximum” where life got so advanced, stressful, and individual-focused that no one’s having kids anymore. What’s wild is that this isn’t just Japan… Korea, Italy, even China are heading the same way. Might be a glimpse of our future — progress leading to population decline

想到日本曾在科技、經(jīng)濟(jì)和文化上如此領(lǐng)先世界，真是不可思議——但現(xiàn)在他們的人口真的要耗盡了。
就好像他們達(dá)到了一個“文化極限”，生活變得如此先進(jìn)、充滿壓力和以個人為中心，以至于再也沒有人要孩子了。
更瘋狂的是，這不僅僅是日本……韓國、意大利，甚至中國都在朝同一個方向發(fā)展。
這可能是我們未來的一個縮影——進(jìn)步導(dǎo)致了人口下降。

@Shell5370
It’s going to be brutal for China ....

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）這對中國來說將是殘酷的……

@GNXX25
they're not ahead anymore. Japan barely get into 20 richest country in the world.

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）他們不再領(lǐng)先了。日本現(xiàn)在幾乎進(jìn)不了世界最富有的20個國家。

@rtjahyadi7868
@GNXX25 they’re not ahead anymore in east asia, they have been surpassed by China and south korea

（回復(fù) @GNXX25）他們在東亞不再領(lǐng)先了，已經(jīng)被中國和韓國超越了。

@GNXX25
?@rtjahyadi7868 South Korea? Yes. China? No. China's GDP Percapita still a third of Japan.

（回復(fù) @rtjahyadi7868）韓國？是的。
中國？不。
中國的人均GDP仍然只是日本的三分之一。

@rtjahyadi7868
@GNXX25 yes in terms of wealth per person but gdp as a whole country, China is 2nd to US, have a check

（回復(fù) @GNXX25）是的，在人均財富方面是這樣，但作為一個整體國家的GDP，中國僅次于美國，去查查看吧。

@GNXX25
?@rtjahyadi7868 Ofc if you measure in totality. China population more than 10x compared to Japan.

（回復(fù) @rtjahyadi7868）當(dāng)然，如果你按總量來衡量的話。中國人口可是日本的10倍以上。

@rtjahyadi7868
@GNXX25 they’re not ahead anymore in east asia, they have been surpassed by China and south korea

（回復(fù) @GNXX25）他們在東亞不再領(lǐng)先了，已經(jīng)被中國和韓國超越了。

@tsukareruru
Please. Japan still uses fax machines and "Hanko" stamps everywhere. And you don't want to know how women are treated in their work culture or how everyone is forced to work overtime. Trust me their work culture is anything but "progressive". Advancement in tech and progressive culture attitude should make life more relaxing and easier, not harder for everyone. The core issure is not "progress" of society as a whole but quite literally, very simple put, the cost of raising a child. That's literally it. The cost of raising a child. Absolutely nothing else. This is not a complex human progress psychological issue. Properties are way too expensive. Raising a child is way too expensive. Everyone is living on rent in developed world. Cost of living. That's the only reason. Nothing else. And you will find this correlation everywhere around the world. If raising a child was very cheap, the population of the world would have been 100 billion already today.

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）拜托。日本到現(xiàn)在還到處在用傳真機(jī)和“判子”印章（譯者注：日本印章“判子”一直是當(dāng)?shù)毓?、組織及個人身份象征，效應(yīng)比簽名作實(shí)還高一個層次）呢。
而且你不會想知道女性在他們的工作文化中是如何被對待的，或者每個人是如何被迫加班的。
相信我，他們的工作文化絕談不上“進(jìn)步”?？萍嫉倪M(jìn)步和開明的文化態(tài)度，應(yīng)該讓生活更放松、更容易，而不是讓每個人都更艱難。
核心問題不是整個社會的“進(jìn)步”，而就是非常、非常簡單的一點(diǎn)：養(yǎng)育一個孩子的成本。
就是這個，絕對沒有別的了。
這不是什么復(fù)雜的人類進(jìn)步心理學(xué)問題。
房子太貴了，養(yǎng)孩子太貴了，在發(fā)達(dá)國家，每個人都在租房住。生活成本，這是唯一的原因，沒有其它。
而且你會在世界各地發(fā)現(xiàn)這種關(guān)聯(lián)。
如果養(yǎng)孩子非常便宜，今天世界人口早就達(dá)到1000億了。

@yo2trader539
@tsukareruru What century are you from?

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）你來自哪個世紀(jì)？

@Abcd-jz4gp
@tsukareruru I agree.

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）我同意。

@bakakafka4428
@tsukareruru While the west no longer uses fax machines, the attitude to work longer and harder and kick down at minorities is growing exponentially here. No reason to think we're better off than Japan.

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）雖然西方不再使用傳真機(jī)，但在這里，工作更長時間、更努力以及打壓少數(shù)族裔的態(tài)度正在指數(shù)級增長。沒理由認(rèn)為我們比日本過得好。

@Afrinaut
@tsukareruru 100% this! I'm tired of people claiming japan is a utopia, when it is in fact very right-wing, not "culturally" progressive in many aspects, deeply conformist not "individualistic" or balanced between the two states-of-mind at all, got reconstrution/reparations from the US post WW2, and learned heavily into the capitalism-grind mind-set. Plus with wages not keeping up with the cost-of-living.

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）100%同意這個！
我厭倦了人們聲稱日本是烏托邦，而實(shí)際上它非常右翼，在許多方面并非“文化上”進(jìn)步，是深度循規(guī)蹈矩而非“個人主義”或在兩種心態(tài)之間平衡，二戰(zhàn)后從美國獲得了重建/賠償，并深度陷入了資本主義的“內(nèi)卷”心態(tài)。
再加上工資跟不上生活成本。

@wrexchicane8259
@tsukareruru I disagree. Cost is only a small factor of reduced family size. The major factors are women’s ability and right to choose when and how many kids they want. It’s availability to contraception to reduce pregnancies. And with more opportunities for women in careers and higher education, they shift their priorities to careers and delay having kids and having less kids for lifestyle choices. As cultures modernize, people shift away from being homestead to being away from home, therefore the desire to have less kids.

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）我不同意。
成本只是家庭規(guī)模減小的一個小因素。
主要因素是女性選擇何時以及想要多少孩子的能力和權(quán)利，是避孕措施的可獲得性以減少懷孕。
隨著女性在職業(yè)和高等教育方面有更多機(jī)會，她們將優(yōu)先事項轉(zhuǎn)向事業(yè)，推遲生育，并為生活方式選擇而少生孩子。隨著文化現(xiàn)代化，人們從居家生活轉(zhuǎn)向離家生活，因此生更少孩子的愿望增加。

@priyansaikia7461
?@tsukareruru Well if these things are done by the US Govt, how would Japanese Lower their pppualtion.

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）嗯，如果這些事情是美國政府做的，日本人怎么會降低他們的人口呢？

@marvin2678
@tsukareruru thas simply not ture, its in rich and poor countries....

（回復(fù) @tsukareruru）那根本不正確，這在富國和窮國都存在……

@fly.into.theblue
One disagreement, Japan is a heavily collectivist society, not an individualist one. People are forced to sacrifice their family life by overworking to enrich the rich people in power

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）一個不同意見，日本是一個重度集體主義社會，而不是個人主義社會。
人們被迫通過過度工作來犧牲他們的家庭生活，以使當(dāng)權(quán)的富人更富有。

@dewaeryadi7776
Japan literally speedrun the civilization after the war

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）戰(zhàn)后日本簡直是快速通關(guān)了文明進(jìn)程。

@greedyreader15
Civilization and development are two different things

（回復(fù) @dewaeryadi7776）文明和發(fā)展是兩回事。

@weekdays_warrior
Japan has ridiculous long hours of working but it's clearly inefficient (productivity should be measured by innovation not just work hours alone) & caused many Japanese in their 20s-30s lost their golden years to marry & build their own family.
This and add that with Japanese unwillingness to learn English as international language, that they failed to catch up with international trend. You can see why software & web development in Asia is dominated by China (especially the HK & Shenzhen-based people), Taiwan and Korea (since the 90s).. why Japanese tech companies are now lack behind.. which further worsening Japan's future prospects.

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）日本的工作時間長得離譜，但顯然效率低下（生產(chǎn)力應(yīng)以創(chuàng)新而非僅工作時長來衡量），這導(dǎo)致許多20-30多歲的日本人失去了結(jié)婚和組建家庭的黃金歲月。
再加上日本人不愿意學(xué)習(xí)英語作為國際語言，導(dǎo)致他們未能跟上國際潮流。
你可以看到為什么亞洲的軟件和網(wǎng)絡(luò)開發(fā)被中國（特別是中國香港（特區(qū)）、臺灣（地區(qū)）和深圳的人）和韓國（自90年代起）主導(dǎo)……
為什么日本科技公司現(xiàn)在落后了……
這進(jìn)一步惡化了日本的未來前景。

@priyansaikia7461
?@weekdays_warrior Japan does have better software developers but not comparable to China in asia or America but surely in the top in the world.

（回復(fù) @weekdays_warrior）日本確實(shí)有更好的軟件開發(fā)者，但在亞洲比不上中國，也比不上美國，但在世界上肯定是頂尖的。

@Dani-kq6qq
Every country is heading the same direction

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）每個國家都在朝同一個方向發(fā)展。

@earlysda
Teaching Evolution and Climate Change to kids makes them have no hope for the future.

（回復(fù) @Dani-kq6qq）教孩子們進(jìn)化論和氣候變化，會讓他們對未來沒有希望。

@Dani-kq6qq
Teaching facts is causing low birthrate? Then you are cooked? @earlysda

（回復(fù) @earlysda）教事實(shí)導(dǎo)致低出生率？那你完蛋了。

@mork6780
That actually happens in many countries. The country becomes prosperous, leading to a golden age where everything is booming. But that also leads to higher standards of living, inflation, and the need for higher salaries to support the quality of life the people become accustomed to. When higher salaries become essential for the people pay their rent and buy their groceries, businesses move elsewhere, leaving the population with less jobs and a higher cost of living.
Ever since the bubble burst in the 90s, the main source of stress for the people of Japan has been financial. People struggled to find good-paying jobs and affordable apartments with more space than my mom's walk-in closet. We hear a lot about the stress put on children to go to cram schools and pass admissions tests to get into the best middle schools, high schools, and then colleges. But those kids go through all that for financial reasons: so they can get a good job.

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）這實(shí)際上在許多國家都發(fā)生。國家變得繁榮，導(dǎo)致一個一切都在蓬勃發(fā)展的黃金時代。
但那也導(dǎo)致了更高的生活水平、通貨膨脹，以及需要更高的薪水來支持人們習(xí)慣的生活質(zhì)量。
當(dāng)更高的薪水成為人們支付房租和購買雜貨的必需品時，企業(yè)就會遷往別處，留給人口更少的工作和更高的生活成本。
自90年代泡沫破裂以來，日本人民壓力的主要來源一直是財務(wù)。
人們努力尋找高薪工作和比我媽媽的步入式衣櫥還大的、負(fù)擔(dān)得起的公寓。
我們聽到很多關(guān)于孩子們上補(bǔ)習(xí)班、通過入學(xué)考試進(jìn)入最好的初中、高中，然后是大學(xué)的壓力。
但那些孩子經(jīng)歷所有這些都是為了經(jīng)濟(jì)原因：這樣他們就能找到一份好工作。

@klofuhdeyfcs
China and South Korea are OK. They have succeeded in training human resources for profitable fields. The problem is aging and redistribution of wealth.

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）中國和韓國還行。他們在為盈利領(lǐng)域培訓(xùn)人力資源方面取得了成功。問題在于老齡化和財富再分配。

@ANONAAAAAAAAA
Japan's population crisis is over overpopulation, not population decline.
Stagnating wages means we have too many working people than demanded, which means we have to decrease our population.
As for old people, there are a lot of jobs old people can engage nowadays and continuing working is good for them to stay healthy both physically and mentally.
When old people can no longer support themselves, then we can offer MAID program just like Canada, since nobody in this country want to live when they can't leave their beds and need to have their stools extracted by care takers.

（回復(fù) @dylanshane）日本的人口危機(jī)是人口過剩，而不是人口下降。
工資停滯意味著我們的勞動人口多于需求，這意味著我們必須減少我們的人口。
至于老年人，如今有很多老年人可以從事的工作，繼續(xù)工作對他們保持身心健康有好處。
當(dāng)老年人無法再自理時，我們可以提供像加拿大那樣的醫(yī)療輔助死亡項目，因為在這個國家，沒人想在無法下床、需要護(hù)理人員幫助排便時還活著。

@Francis-f4f
"Stagnating wages means we have too many working people than demanded," This is nonsense there is no mass unemployment in Japan.
"As for old people, there are a lot of jobs old people can engage nowadays and continuing working is good for them to stay healthy both physically and mentally." The right to retire is a human right, many old people's bodies are crushed by the time they reach retirement and have the right to have publicly subsidized retirement. You are an extremely out of touch individual.

（回復(fù) @ANONAAAAAAAAA）“工資停滯意味著我們的勞動人口多于需求，”這是胡說，日本沒有大規(guī)模失業(yè)。
“至于老年人，如今有很多老年人可以從事的工作，繼續(xù)工作對他們保持身心健康有好處。”退休權(quán)是一項人權(quán)，許多老年人的身體到退休時已經(jīng)垮了，他們有權(quán)享受公共補(bǔ)貼的退休生活。
你是個極其脫離現(xiàn)實(shí)的人。

@jonasp8920
This obsession of western media to compare China and Japan is so dishonest. The situation is completely different between the two, China is sovereign and not under the boot of America. Japan's stagnation and refusal to move away from the neo-liberal economic policies of the last 50 years is what led to this situation.

西方媒體這種比較中國和日本的執(zhí)念非常不誠實(shí)。兩國情況完全不同，中國是主權(quán)國家，不受美國控制。日本的停滯以及拒絕擺脫過去50年的新自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)政策才是導(dǎo)致這種情況的原因。