Are you going to choose? Sounds like you would.
Choose what?
How families are defined? They take all forms, you wrote. What does that mean? African families should adopt Chinese babies?
Thatâs the problem with having an economic model dependent on the pyramid scheme of infinite population growth.
[/quote]
Crowded with long lines doesnât mean overpopulated.
You donât need to live in Taiwan to know that a super-aged population is national suicide. Fewer and fewer workers supporting more and more old people.
You donât need to live in Taiwan to know that older people are more stubborn and get stuck in their ways with inefficient management practices.
I didnât say they were welcomed, only that (1) people know theyâre needed and
I donât need to live in Taiwan to know that a super-aged population is a strain on fewer and fewer workers. I donât need to live in Taiwan to know that old people are stubborn and keep
[/quote]
Most people here do not think immigrants are needed, just low cost labour. If those jobs had local pay rates there would be less need to import workers.
What on earth are you taking about? Families taking on all forms means neither of us get to choose how they are defined.
Yet that is what you seem to be advocating.
Didnât China try that?
You have everything backwards. Itâs less a pyramid scheme if we more workers paying for relatively fewer old people.
But Iâm sure the Social Security Administration will buy your grandiose, non-Quixotic plan and stay solvent.
Need them, want them, whatever.
You âseem toâ have an active imagination.
And nobody is talking about mandating reduced reproduction. Ditch the straw man BS if you want to have a conversation.
So youâre saying itâs not a pyramid scheme as long as the pyramid keeps growing. Have you considered a career in âmulti-level marketingâ?
The SSA is a perfect example of a pyramid scheme based on infinite population growth. Thanks for contributing to my point.
Youâre the one concerned with population growth. I am simply trying to get a clearer picture of what you mean. Thatâs why I ask questions. Donât get all homer on me now. You think the world is overpopulated. Why? You think people shouldnât procreate more than the replacement rateâŚhow would that even be administered/legislated/enforced if not by using a similar one child policy?
Iâm not saying it should be legislated or mandated. Iâm saying itâs a good thing when it happens as a natural result of a growing middle class and increased access to education and family planning. It sure as hell shouldnât be fought or discouraged.
They probably donât want to. At the end of the day, Taiwanese people are what makes this place great. Immigration has been very damaging in many western countries when it has not been well controlled or selective enough. Locals reject it. You get all sorts of cultural issues from the loss of harmony. I donât think it would be a benefit to Taiwan overall.
If Taiwan is going to attract and bring in people with real skills who pay tax etc, that would be one thing. No country has a problem with that. But a bunch of backpacker types or unskilled teachers⌠not exactly a great contribution if weâre totally honest. Itâs only worth increasing the population if theyâre going to be net contributors.
The real reforms should be measures to increase the population. Encourage women to have children earlier, and structure laws (employment, maternity etc) around it. And the housing situation needs to be improved. If 3 bedrooms costs 2500wan, it doesnât promote large families either.
I agree with you, except I donât think there needs to be that much selection. People arenât going to come to Taiwan if no one wants to hire them.
Do you know how a pyramid is shaped?
In a pyramid scheme, more and more people are owed money without money to pay them. Thatâs exactly what you get when you have a declining population.
Which is kinda where we are anyway:
Population in the world is currently (2020) growing at a rate of around 1.05% per year (down from 1.08% in 2019, 1.10% in 2018, and 1.12% in 2017). The current average population increase is estimated at 81 million people per year. Annual growth rate reached its peak in the late 1960s, when it was at around 2%.
I believe the book Factfulness has a LOT to say about this. Good read all around.
I agree. Society canât sustain so many elderly at current birthrates.
No, what makes it a pyramid scheme is that itâs depending on infinite exponential growth that canât be sustained. When the rate of growth inevitably starts to taper off, the whole thing crashes.
Youâre equating the scheme with only the inevitable crash rather than the system (the scheme) that is set up to be dependent on the inevitable never occurring.
Well, thatâs why immigration laws need retooling.