The good: a lower total population is good for climate change. Additionally, humans can focus on living in the most habitable, productive areas, improving per capita efficiency.
The neutral: day-to-day things are unlikely to be affected much. Fewer farmers, but fewer mouths to feed. This applies to most consumables.
The mildly negative: for knowledge intangibles, a lower total population means a lower number of scientists, entrepreneurs, etc. Perhaps substantially less. Apex projects that take a substantial proportion of the world's capital and labor (e.g. colonies on Mars) become a lot harder, with many becoming impossible. This is somewhat counteracted by most countries becoming richer and more educated.
The disastrous: older societies where each person working has to support multiple other people are sclerotic societies. A society where younger workers have to pay taxes 2x higher than they do today, to support a bunch of old people who already own all the housing and capital stocks? That's a society that I'd move away from in a hurry, regardless of if I'm old or young. I'm going to have to encourage any kids I have to study Yoruba.
This is one of those huge issues on par with climate change, but people mostly don't care or think about it. I'm not sure what governments can do about it. At some point I want to study Israeli demographics and fertility more, as it's the only country I know of that has maintained a high TFR (>2.1) even in its secular populations.
> "A society where younger workers having to pay taxes 2x higher or more than they do today..."
Most likely social welfare programs for the elderly will simply be allowed to collapse. Nothing will motivate the young to vote like having their paychecks eaten away.
I feel bad for young people graduating now; if they're not able to save the _entire_ cost of their own retirement over the course of their career, they are just plain screwed.
Retired voters, and voters approaching retirement, will fight denture and nail against that. The likely result is some claw back of benefits for them, but young workers would still carry a much heavier tax burden than the retired class did, preempting their own retirement savings. That causes them to defer or forego marriage and children as well, causing a continuing downward spiral.
Without an attestupa or genuine efforts to improve fertility rates, we're in for very grim times in most countries. There's a kind of virtuous cycle here, though, as a government that does figure out how to mold its age demographics in an effective manner will be a much more attractive destination for young emigrants.
Scleroticism doesn't imply horror stories. What I'd expect for it to do is drive out-migration and a lowered quality of life. And, looking at hard numbers, more Japanese people are emigrating and more young Japanese are committing suicide, in a country that already has high suicide rates. I'd be curious about the relation between aged societies and those numbers across the OECD.
The subjective stories I read don't suggest a particularly bright experience for most younger Japanese, though I'd be the first to point out that those are often more interested in painting a narrative for gullible Westerners than offering any real analysis.
I agree that Japan is a useful canary, and policymakers should watch its experience closely to evaluate how serious the problem is and potential solutions.
The neutral: day-to-day things are unlikely to be affected much. Fewer farmers, but fewer mouths to feed. This applies to most consumables.
The mildly negative: for knowledge intangibles, a lower total population means a lower number of scientists, entrepreneurs, etc. Perhaps substantially less. Apex projects that take a substantial proportion of the world's capital and labor (e.g. colonies on Mars) become a lot harder, with many becoming impossible. This is somewhat counteracted by most countries becoming richer and more educated.
The disastrous: older societies where each person working has to support multiple other people are sclerotic societies. A society where younger workers have to pay taxes 2x higher than they do today, to support a bunch of old people who already own all the housing and capital stocks? That's a society that I'd move away from in a hurry, regardless of if I'm old or young. I'm going to have to encourage any kids I have to study Yoruba.
This is one of those huge issues on par with climate change, but people mostly don't care or think about it. I'm not sure what governments can do about it. At some point I want to study Israeli demographics and fertility more, as it's the only country I know of that has maintained a high TFR (>2.1) even in its secular populations.