This is another angst article? A doom prediction article? Actually, yes. Is it about pollution, overpopulation, meteor strike, nuclear war, famine, revolutions, super volcanoes, beginning of ice age, overheating, plagues, biological attacks, alien invasions, and any other b-film, ignorants and corrupted, manipulating politicians described disasters, nature- or man made existential threatening disasters, turning the earth sterile or simply explode it, breaking into peaces?
Over a period of 44 years, the fertility rate has fallen in the biggest parts of the world. It’s like to see a body infected by a virus. What was once a time (44 years ago), where it was normal to have families with more then four children, it’s now normal to have one to two children.
That’s good news for the liberals and democrats in America in 2018, but what these people don’t realize is that this is also the end of their ideological fantasies; they act like a suicidal movement. Take a look at Europe:
Look at the colors: brown is bad, light pink is good. For the liberals it’s opposite. Maybe. Now let’s see what this actually means for the world when there are less and less children and more and more elderly?
Pensions are paid by those who are working to the pensioners. Simple, not? And there is no problem at all with that, except that every year there are less and less people who are working, more and more people who need pension. And that’s not all, in the future there will be even less people who are working paying the taxes and pensions and again more people enjoying the pensions.
It has (for the elderly) all to do with the life expectancy (at birth till death in years). For example, the life expectancy in the Bronze Age was 33 years. Funny though, that during the medieval Islamic world it was 35+, classical Rome 25, classical Greece 25-28, early modern England it was 33-40,18th century Qing China it was 39.6 years, early 1900 world it was 31, 1950 world it was 48 and in 2014 it’s 71.5 years (source).
For your information, if you are younger then 45, you will never enjoy your pension as you can foresee or expect, because the pension funds are running dry. Can you imagine, that you’re 65 years old, sick, hardly able to move, and there is nothing to eat, or to live in, no house or apartment? You’ll die. Maybe that will solve the graying populations by killing off the elderly. Eh. No.
The Internet is full with warnings from many scientists, specialists, governments about the looming pension funds collapse.
Population ageing is an increasing median age in the population of a region due to declining fertility rates and/or rising life expectancy.
That’s the dictionary speaking.
In plain English it means that half the people are younger than a certain age and half are older. It is a single index that summarizes the age distribution of a (or world) population. In 2015, that index is 29.6 years. But let’s look at this age in the future:
- In 2020, that number will increase to 30.9
- In 2025, that number will increase to 32.1
- In 2050, that number will increase to 36.8
- In 2075, that number will increase to 39 (with low-fertility, it will be 45.6)
- In 2100, that number will increase to 41.6 (with low-fertility, it will be 49.2)
Countries with the biggest elderly population in the world are:
|Rank||Country||% of population over 65 years old|
|20||Czech Republic||18.1 %|
|24||United Kingdom||17.8 %|
As you see, Japan is on the top of this list. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has made tackling the problem of Japan’s shrinking population a priority, but experts say preventing the looming demographic crisis is virtually impossible.
In plain English again, it’s the growth of people who live in a country. They use a certain formula to calculate the population growth according to this:
(birth rate + immigration) – (death rate + emigration)
Currently this is a problematic number, because there are dramatically (increasingly) less children born (birth rate, in some countries like the US and Europe a strong increase in immigration), a delayed death rate (by improved health care) and a decreased emigration (people moving out of their country to another country).
Uganda (32.9), Angola (32.7) and Mali (32) are on the top-3 of natural population growth, Ukraine (-4.4), Latvia (-5.1) and Bulgaria (-6) are on the bottom-3 of the natural population growth in 2015-2020.
Niger (36.61), Uganda (35.65) and Gaza Strip (32.90) are on the top 3 of natural population growth, Bulgaria (-5.70), Serbia (-4.60) and Latvia (-4.60) are on the bottom-3 of the natural population growth in 2010.
The shrinking labor force
The labor force of the world population (or a population in a country, state, province, community or city) is defined by the dependency ratio. Which means in plain English the parts of the population, which depends on those working and paying taxes. Those are the part of the population, which do not participate in the labor force (the dependent part ages 0 to 14 and 65+).
A lower ratio could allow for example for better pensions and better health care for residents. A higher ratio would indicate more financial stress between working people and dependents.
The total dependency ratio is calculated as follows:
|Latin America & The Caribbean||78.0||86.7||69.8||52.4||50.2||57.3||70.7||80.4|
- In Japan and Europe (2010), Japan and Europe had high aged dependency ratios (that is over 65 as % of workforce), compared with the rest of the world.
- In Europe 2010, for every adult aged 65 and older there are about four working age adults (15-64). This ratio (one:four, or 25%) is expected to decrease to one:two, or 50%, by 2050.
- The dependency among Japan residents aged 65 and older is expected to increase which will have a major impact on Japan’s economy.
What does that all mean for everyone on earth?
What do you think yourself? Are you really so simple that you don’t realize what that actually means?
The simple and obvious answer is that the aging world population has economic implications. All countries faces multiple problems of making hard decisions to protect itself from the implications or faces seriously slowing or halting economical growth and exploding social costs to deal with aging populations.
In plain English it actually means:
- Or no work, no fancy policies like abortions, collapsing industries and trade, collapsing infrastructures, no medical services, no food or housing, mass starvation, death and destruction, collapsing government services, etc. All that what you can see in those cheap b-rated movies of Hollywood, but coming to reality, only much worse
- Or government forced measures to keep the disasters at bay, like forbidding abortions (today in 2018, half of the American pregnancies are aborted!), increased age of pension (instead of 55 years in some countries, it might well be to 70 or 80 years of age), tax rates up to 80% or higher, forced pregnancies per woman instead of family, very difficult to divorce, strong (government) support for religions, applying technologies on industry, production and care (AI-related)
It means that in certain countries, the government is taking measures to avoid the collapse of the country because of the large and growing dependency on the shrinking workers. That means that the number of children need to increase dramatically in order to provide the numbers of workers to pay the bills of a country. That also means an increased immigration to the country and the need to integrate them into the working population. That also means that social processes (if you can call that) like abortion and basic human rights might be very likely to be restricted. The alternative is the end of the country and not having any rights at all then only global disaster.
Alternatively the country is doing nothing or is hopelessly paralyzed with infighting, and that means the collapse of the country. Situations like in Venezuela is nothing compared what will wait for such country.
Immigration to be used as a plaster on a heavily bleeding wound would not stop the bleeding. Also in the case of the problems of the growing dependency of workers will not be solved by immigration. Immigration is actually nothing else then moving the problems location and time-line wise. Location? From where the immigrants are coming from are going to have the same problems and time-line problems means that the problem of the growing dependency of workers will only be postponed. Also the problem with immigration (in high numbers) is that they are not going to be integrated in society (that’s a process, which takes at least three generations) and so not productive and actually makes the problem worse.
In direct future, it’s to expected that migration is more expensive then the flight of economical resources. Also what is to expected is the importance of workers to be increased.
When do we see the effects becoming reality?
I’m 59 years of age (when writing this post), and I’m a coward, because I’m happy (and actually hoping) that I’m gone when this start to happen (when the shit hits the pan). For everyone younger then me, and that includes sadly my children, they will see and experience the effects.
So, who’s the first to collapse?
- Pakistan (median age in 2010:21.3 – median age in 2040: 29.4, birthrate 65 out of 223), population growth in 2040: +38%
- Egypt (median age in 2010:23.9 – median age in 2040: 32.8, birthrate 69 out of 223), population growth in 2040: +32%
- Saudi Arabia (median age in 2010:24.6 – median age in 2040: 33.8, birthrate 51 out of 223), population growth in 2040:+54%
- Ukraine (median age in 2010:39.5 – median age in 2040: 46.6, birthrate 202 out of 223), population growth in 2040:-21%
- South Korea (median age in 2010:37.9 – median age in 2040: 51.0, birthrate 212 out of 223), population growth in 2040:-2.5%
- Russia (median age in 2010:38.1 – median age in 2040: 45.5, birthrate 178 out of 223), population growth in 2040: -13%
- Germany(median age in 2010:44.3 – median age in 2040: 51.2, birthrate 220 out of 223), population growth in 2040:-10%
- China (median age in 2010:34.2 – median age in 2040: 44.1, birthrate 151 out of 223)., population growth in 2040:+7.5%
- Japan (median age in 2010:44.7 – median age in 2040: 54.7, birthrate 222 out of 223), population growth in 2040:-15%
- USA (median age in 2010:36.6 – median age in 2040: 40.8, birthrate 154 out of 223)., population growth in 2040: +22%