Global Population Trends

[Saulaac]

Wealthy pensioners should take a hit.

Just means-test the state pension. It's not right that these people, mostly homeowners with generous work pensions anyway, should then be entitled to state support when there are more needy people in society. Take for example Sir Alex Ferguson. He's entitled to state pension and no doubt claims it. Why should he get it? I love him but why?

You will hear the bleats of "it's my money!" and cries of "I've paid in all my life", well no you haven't, you paid for the pensions during your working life and now the current workforce pays for yours. There is no pot. It's not even a pension. It's a benefit. And it's high time old people realised this. You've had cheap housing and benefited from astronomical property price rises. You've bought your council homes when we had plenty of council housing. You've had good, secure work with wage increases every year. You've had free higher education and free TV licenses, free bus passes and so on. Time for you to take a fucking hit for once. Tory voting cunts.

Fucking sick of it.

Wealthy pensioners moaning about Starmer and Labour stopping the WFA for pensioners with an income over a certain amount. You don't fucking need the £300 anyway you greedy fuck.

Winds me up.

And yes I am slightly mad bro.

Well you're justified in being pissed off, imo. Less well-off pensioners were also hit with the winter fuel allowance cuts, so a double whammy at a time when they had just voted in a Labour government who they thought would protect them better. Bastards. Tbh I don't think any of the two main parties in any country are much different these days.
But I don't have a solution. Maybe to support a "radical centre" candidate who can inspire both entrepreneurship and a strong welfare state?

In France, pensions are means tested, so you're eligible for a basic state pension if you didn't pay into a private/corporate pension fund. If you did pay into a private fund, and espectially if you're well off, then you don't get the state pension. That to to me is common sense.

I broadly agree, except to say that most people lie in between groups 1 and 2 that you identified above. That doesn't make your analysis wrong, just incomplete.
It used be said that the problem was that couples were having too few children, but that has now progressed to there are now simply too few couples.

Yep, I kind of wanted to highlight both ends of the spectrum, but sure there is a very large middle bit. However, it appears that wealth distribution is becoming more unequal which would suggest a move towards the extremes rather than a convergence towards the middle. I might and watch "Margin Call" again tonight with Kevin Spacey, Jeremy Irons... There are some good scenes in there.

[jimmy jazz]

Well you're justified in being pissed off, imo. Less well-off pensioners were also hit with the winter fuel allowance cuts, so a double whammy at a time when they had just voted in a Labour government who they thought would protect them better. Bastards. Tbh I don't think any of the two main parties in any country are much different these days.
But I don't have a solution. Maybe to support a "radical centre" candidate who can inspire both entrepreneurship and a strong welfare state?

In France, pensions are means tested, so you're eligible for a basic state pension if you didn't pay into a private/corporate pension fund. If you did pay into a private fund, and espectially if you're well off, then you don't get the state pension. That to to me is common sense.

I can accept that maybe the cut off point was too low, needs looking at to be sure people aren't genuinely struggling. But there are also plenty of wealthy pensioners pleading poverty purely to attack Labour when it just isn't true. They voted Tory in their droves when they were making cuts to PIP and putting a cap on child benefit (think it was two kids), so clearly large numbers of them were fine when other people faced cuts. They just didn't think it would happen to them and now it has they don't like it.

[jimmy jazz]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn7gzx2dz23o

Another one pleading poverty.

She is 66, so has only just become eligible for the state pension and wouldn't have received the WFA anyway.

[SGR]

^^^ Love it. Feel free to take up the cudgel.

Trust me, if I was a Malthusian, I would - but even then, no one could do it like Hawk could do it. He stuck to his guns on the issue, I'll give him that. 

[Saulaac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn7gzx2dz23o

Another one pleading poverty.

She is 66, so has only just become eligible for the state pension and wouldn't have received the WFA anyway.

The lady said she has £4 left in the bank and feels like a failure. Kin hell  . But still smiling in the photo like a beam of light.

If she owns the house (wasn't mentioned in the article) then at least she has a way out. If renting then that's crappy.

What's WFA. Work Force Adjustment?

[jimmy jazz]

The lady said she has £4 left in the bank and feels like a failure. Kin hell  . But still smiling in the photo like a beam of light.

If she owns the house (wasn't mentioned in the article) then at least she has a way out. If renting then that's crappy.

What's WFA. Work Force Adjustment?

Winter Fuel Allowance. The government paid it to all pensioners up to an amount of £300 to help with energy bills.

It's not true mate, she never got the WFA as she was never eligible for it. She hasn't 'lost' it any more than I have.

[Saulaac]

Huh? The article is deliberately misleading then, or she was fibbing to the reporter.

[jimmy jazz]

Huh? The article is deliberately misleading then, or she was fibbing to the reporter.

Exactly. Work it out if you don't believe me.

State pension age is 66 and has been since 2020. She's 66 now, so she couldn't have got it before this year as she was not eligible for the state pension. It was cut months ago (in other words before winter), so she hasn't lost anything because she has never received it.

[Saulaac]

OK, but I don't get why the beeb would interview her then.
Well spotted btw.

[Buck_Mulligan]

Korea has just created a Ministry of Population Decline...

Hiroshi Yoshida, a professor at the Tohoku University Research Center for Aging Economics and Society, has developed a demographic clock that tracks Japan's population decline in real time. His calculations paint a grim picture: if birth rates continue to plummet at their current pace, Japan could have just one child under 14 left by January 5, 2720. This projection highlights the severity of Japan's demographic crisis and the urgent need for action.

Yoshida's research also touches on cultural and legislative quirks that exacerbate the issue. For instance, Japan's marriage name law could lead to a surprising consequence: by 2531, nearly all Japanese citizens could share the same surname, Sato. This prediction underscores the compounding pressures of demographic decline and cultural norms, further emphasizing the need for comprehensive reforms.

https://indiandefencereview.com/by-this-date-one-major-country-will-have-only-one-child-left-warns-analyst/

[Buck_Mulligan]

India has 28 states + 8 territories. Only 4 of them, (albeit the most populous) have a fertility rate above replacement.

https://x.com/indiainpixels/status/1464197969016614915?lang=en-GB&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Elsewhere, Finland is in trouble. It's incentives don't seem to be working...

https://www.passblue.com/2025/01/27/finland-offers-more-perks-to-stop-its-declining-birth-rate-women-shrug-it-off/

[Buck_Mulligan]

There are now over 40 countries, many European, classified as super-aged, meaning at least 20% of the population is over 65.
Japan has 30%. Canada just crossed 20%. US can't be far behind.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-the-worlds-super-aged-societies/#google_vignette

[Buck_Mulligan]

Currently, 128 of 233 (55%) of countries and territories measured have a fertility rate below replacement level.
You don't expect Latam to figure highly because of it's catholic culture, but on current trends by 2100 it will be the oldest region in the world.

Latin America is aging at an extraordinary pace, raising fears that the region is unprepared for the needs of its growing elderly population. Plummeting birth rates and rising life expectancy mean that by 2100 more than 31% of Latin America's population is expected to be 65 or older, a greater proportion than any other region in the world. Meanwhile, many workers in the region's large informal employment sector have no pension savings and slowing economic growth has left countries unprepared for the demographic shift. "There's a saying: 'Latin America gets older before it gets richer,'" an expert at the Inter-American Development Bank told Americas Quarterly.

[Buck_Mulligan]

Typically, a country's population will halve in a generation (usually considered 30 years to allow for those outside childbearing age), when the TFR drops to 1.0. Lot's of western countries are currently well below the TFR replacement level of 2.1. Many are at or below 1.5.
This will have implications, (none of which are good), for tax rates, pensions, retirement age, health care, social services etc.

https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/total-fertility-rate/country-comparison/

[Guybrush]

The Guardian just ran an article about predicted population changes in European countries in scenarios with and without migration.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2025/feb/18/europes-population-crisis-see-how-your-country-compares-visualised