Hacker News Reader

Cash strapped 30 year olds are most likely to engage when engagement means no longer being cash strapped.

To resolve that, the 60yo+ generation now controlling 80% of the wealth will need to part with that wealth to incentivize the following generation to maintain their standard of living.

It turned out that when pressured with indefinite hand-to-mouth conditions, people found other ways to checkout of the economy, even if it meant living in the woods.

Cash strapped 30 year olds are most likely to engage when engagement means no longer being cash strapped.

This isn't the cause of the labour shortage, and it will not solve it either.

Note: I already said; fair wage is sensible.

To resolve that, the 60yo+ generation now controlling 80% of the wealth will need to part with that wealth to

This number is wildly inaccurate. But beyond that, no one is hoarding anything.

Instead, it is called "retirement savings". It is money for housing, health care, nursing home costs, food, and to help offspring. Once retired, the valves open, because few have pensions, and even those that do, it is not enough.

So your desire already happens, naturally.

What you are describing is called "being responsible", and an attempt for people to not burden themselves on their children.

These are not miserable bastards, trying to keep money from the young.

And when these people die, that money doesn't vanish, it flows to offspring.

> For additional clarity, the world will be at about 5 billion at 2040, without war or plague.

I can find no immediate evidence that any demographers actually claim this.

I am interested by your sources, the most generic world population projection I see online for 2040 are some kind of peak between 8-10 billions and then it is slowly decreasing until 2100.

But I am really interested if there are other projections with lower numbers!

With a lack of labour, comes a lack of medical care.

While there was a problem with health care funding in Canada, current issues are more severe. There are not enough doctors, nurses, and so on.

And this problem will get worse and worse, as it will everywhere. For example, even with covid numbers way down, hospitals in many areas of Canada are constantly overrun. Hospitals overrun is made worse, because many people have no family doctor, and must go to a hospital for minor issues.

There are not enough beds, with people often stuck in the halls, or being discharged early.

And this is just at the start of this employability crisis.

Now imagine how life expectancy looks, if you cannot get surgeries which extend that life, or, even have issues getting basic blood work done, and preemptive tests.

Most of the population stats you see, are predicated upon life expectancy staying the same, not crashing.

Secondly, China has been lying about population numbers for years, and recent numbers show it is far worse that they admit.

An ominous note here: this is not a temporary thing. With some reproductive numbers approaching 1 per two people, we are already slated for half a century of this, at least.

And if we try to bring those numbers up to "replacement" levels, as some areas have urged/begged their citizens to do? If we try to return them to at least 2.2 per couple?

It means a generation or two of people still caring for the excess elderly, and also caring for the excess young. Squeezed on both ends.

> It means a generation or two of people still caring for the excess elderly, and also caring for the excess young. Squeezed on both ends.

If you're talking about Gen Y and Z ( though Gen Y [millenials] only has another 10-15 years in a suitable baby-making age range) they'd have to also not be living paycheck to paycheck or with a very minor cushion to even entertain the idea of having kids.

I'm in my late 30s and I only have a couple friends who have had a baby in the last 10 years (well one is pregant). The rest are unable to afford more than their own 100-150 square foot room in a shared house due to the housing crisis in my city (Vancouver). I've already resigned that I would never be able to afford kids even if I wanted them

Yeah, fuck making housing affordable and people actually wanting to start a family, let's go to child labour to offset the problem for few years

people actually wanting to start a family, let's go to child labour to offset the problem for few years

Quebec has all sorts of bonuses, tax deductions, monthly payouts per child, and Canada (the federal level) kicks in incentives as well. Quebec provides extremely low cost day care too.

Nothing makes a difference. It isn't money.

I often see couples with 2 new cars, $1000 smart phones, 70" TVs, saying it's money. While clearly everyone isn't well enough off for this, if money was the issue, why are well off people not having 4 kids? Or even 3, often?

How much money do you think the government provides to couples (or single parents) with kids? It's not enough to enjoy some of the luxuries our parents had, such as being able to rent a place where you don't share a bedroom with your kid, or being able to rent a place with space to do things like have a sex life that's not basically the same as doing it in front of your kid because the walls are paper thin, or being able to go on family vacations once or twice a year, or being able to feed your family healthy food.

In Vancouver, I have only a couple of friend with kids. One has a FAANG management job after years of IC. The other is a single mother who works odd jobs and has kids in their teens now (one might be 20 actually). She receives alimony and government benefits, and allowed her to keep them fed and even take them on vacation once a year, but only because she locked in a rental unit 20 years ago and never moved or got evicted, and has some untaxed money coming in from selling art, the benefits, and she never eats out (only cooks and shops on budget). And she has shared custody with the father of one who does have some kind of job.

This isn't possible for people who don't have that stable place to live, and even then she doesn't have the freedom that my parents did to take them to things that cost money

A new car and a couple of smartphones don't make up the difference to pay for an extra room in a house.

Your predictions make sense but your timelines are off. China's population isn't going to halve by 2035. The graph you saw was either about birth rates, or did not have a Y-axis starting at 0.

> I don't understand. The current labour shortage is, 100%, hands down, fully stop, start to finish, a result of boomers retiring.

What I'd love to know is why this labour shortage doesn't lead to increased wages for the workers who are not retiring.

Essentially, price elasticity of demand. There's a ton of services/products I would consume at an arbitrarily low price that I won't at a much higher price. And some services have a very large labor component.

Why do you think the .1% is making hand over fist right now. They keep jacking up prices and the investor class isn't sharing the profits.

That said, wages have gone up some, but generally not for people that remain at a company, you have to be willing to switch jobs to get the benefit.

If there are less working age adults, there should be less demand for goods and services, so some businesses need to close.

Boomers and their offspring loved to give away extra free labor. Younger generations have learned that's a fruitless endeavor.

>If there are less working age adults, there should be less demand for goods and services, so some businesses need to close.

I'm not sure how that follows. An aging population wants a different basket of goods and services but it's not necessarily smaller and is likely to be greater with respect to e.g. healthcare.