• douglasg14b@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Decline population is an actual thing…? Not defending this asshole or anything but your statement is seemingly based off of a lack of information.

    Birth rates in many developed countries are incredibly low well below maintenance levels. Meaning that aside from immigration the population in most developed countries is actually going down quite rapidly.

    Which given the way our societies and financial systems are structured generally means some form of disaster for those countries if such decline occurs.

    There’s even a pretty good recent video talking about what this looks like in South Korea

    Blue indicates below replacement levels:

    • Bloomcole@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Still one billion in 1804
      two billion in 1927
      three billion in 1960
      four billion in 1974
      five billion in 1987
      six billion in 1999
      seven billion in 2011
      eight billion in 2022

      Already too many for my taste.
      And no to all, don’t react with irrelevant “there’s enough food for…” or Malthusian bla bla

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        And no to all, don’t react with irrelevant “there’s enough food for…” or Malthusian bla bla

        So, don’t bother you with the downside of what’s actually going to happen? What’s in the middle of happening? You’re just going to do a little cherry-picking, then tell us don’t bother you with facts?

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBudghsdByQ

        You can already see it in real time by looking at the demographics in South Korea and Japan. The only reason the numbers are offset is that a few countries are still net positive enough to offset them.

        Our great-grandkids are in for one hell of a ride. If we let it drop enough, they’ll be in forced breeding situations.

        • Bloomcole@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          A world with a lot less people sounds like a dream TBH.
          No overcrowded cities, no chasing animals of their land or destroying it for resources, etc…

            • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              If you can get even low quality robots that can provide some amount of elder care, even if it’s just reminding them to take prescriptions and helping them walk, then you can drastically reduce the economic problems. there will be massive shortages of basic CNA and nursing home care workers.

              • rumba@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Caring for the elderly is unfortunately a very small piece of the pie. A small number of CNA can handle a pretty decent number of elderly, in a facility.

                Of course, we (corporate) stretch those CNA as thin as possible.

                Automation in every industry that we’re so worried about being our undoing will soften the blow.

                It’s possible that nanny bots could eventually help ease daycare costs.

                Problematically anytime somebody creates something that reduces financial cost for someone else, They usually end up charging them significant amounts for it. Those inexpensive elderly care robots will end up being subscriptions and have planned obsolescence. Everybody’s got to get a piece of that pie.

                • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Do you have numbers for that? Because staffing is already very short and the ratio of workers to people needing care will get much higher. And a lot of them will want to stay in their home, which needs a much higher amount of care than in a centralized facility.

                  • rumba@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Sure!

                    Depends on what you’re looking for capability-wise.

                    DME pill dispenser that notifies family if they’re not taking the glass off the platform is a couple of grand and available now. It’s like $100 worth of parts. Of course, you can have it for less upfront by paying a perpetual subscription fee.

                    But helping them walk, Helping them get up, even if steps aren’t involved, that’s a way higher price tag, we’re looking at something Atlas or ASIMO class, you’re looking at 1-2 million for the hardware and basic functionality. Tacking on insurance because they will be sued when someone slips and a decade or so of r&d in hospice and homecare. I don’t think we’re likely to see anything affordable in 1-2 generations.

                    Japan is leading the charge in looking at this because it’s being hit hard by population decline. This will be in their face shortly. They have bots that can drive around and talk to people and can report on people in distress. Those are more car-priced. They’re not going to help anyone walk, but they can provide companionship, which isn’t nothing.

                    With lifespans advancing and birthrates dropping, you can be sure that they’ll be moving as fast as they can. Even if the hardware becomes affordable, they’ll charge as much as the market will bear. Look at the price for senior care. They own the building, and they’re understaffing the facilities as much as possible. Slumlording as a service.