TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Ghost cities and abandoned areas with a declining population

175 pointsby haakonhrover 4 years ago

19 comments

hyper_realityover 4 years ago
The article notes that in South Korea, &quot;from next year, cash bonuses of 2m won (£1,320) will be paid to every couple expecting a child, on top of existing child benefit payments&quot;.<p>These cash awards for having children being paid by developed countries are laughably far too little, too late in their intention. Looking at the issue in financial terms, having a child and bringing them up well is an enormous cost both in money and time. The most significant being the opportunity cost of at least one parent&#x27;s ability to participate economically being severely reduced for years. Brian Tomasik estimated that having a child may cost over $300k when measured in those terms, although there is some USA slant in his analysis (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;reducing-suffering.org&#x2F;the-cost-of-kids&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;reducing-suffering.org&#x2F;the-cost-of-kids&#x2F;</a>).<p>Now, Tomasik does mention that having children cannot be judged economically, it&#x27;s a special and important experience that you can&#x27;t place a price on. On the other hand, there&#x27;s no denying that raising a child in today&#x27;s world is simply unthinkable for many young adults who are struggling with insecurity in housing, careers, and a bleaker outlook on the future. Many commodities are historically cheap today but property is extremely less affordable, and most prospective parents would rather delay having children until they can achieve career stability and afford a reasonably-sized house, which is happening very late in life (if at all) compared to previous generations.<p>If governments were really serious about reversing the decline in birth rates, they should be looking at pursuing better policies for ensuring more people can afford a home, or providing free childcare at scale - tackling the underlying societal reasons why this trend is occurring rather than adding a hopelessly insufficient cash bandaid. Furthermore, a cash bonus creates a perverse incentive where some people may grab the short term reward without necessarily considering the long term sacrifice involved in having kids.
评论 #25897869 未加载
评论 #25896644 未加载
评论 #25898184 未加载
评论 #25894944 未加载
评论 #25895625 未加载
评论 #25901971 未加载
ubertoopover 4 years ago
&gt; it recently announced that state clinics would no longer hand out contraceptives or offer vasectomies<p>What a backwards and ill informed way of handling a declining birth rate. We should not be promoting accidental births, but instead doing everything we can to ensure couples live in a world where they WANT to bring another life into it.<p>- Good pay<p>- Safe neighborhoods<p>- Balance work&#x2F;life<p>- Assurances of healthcare for themselves and their family<p>- Hope that the future will be even better than the already wonderful, today.<p>Very few of these things are true for the average worker these days. Often in the US, if you want to have kids, you are writing off your ability to ever retire.
评论 #25895058 未加载
评论 #25896938 未加载
评论 #25901968 未加载
m23khanover 4 years ago
being a wealthy country often means:<p>nuclear families + rise in dual income households = greater GDP = greater inflation = push for knowledge economy = loss of unionized workplaces = reduced workplace benefits such as defined benefit pension = increase scrutiny of worker = more educated workforce = more competition at workplace = greater time commitment towards work and self knowledge upgrade = greater demands for expensive leisure activities<p>Not against any step of the process that I listed above. I am just stating the societal transformation as I see it for any xyz country out there that becomes wealthy over time.<p>However, this model ultimately ends up treating children and sometimes marriage (And even romantic relationships to an extent) as shackles and hurdles on the road to success. And for those who still want to get into relationship and have kid(s) unfortunately means you have to work and save for a lot longer time before making it economically feasible to have kid(s).<p>While this may still work out in case of males, for females, unfortunately, the more they wait to have kids (hey, I am not saying anything against this -- it is their body and their choice and their is nothing wrong with this and yes, all the power to them -- I get that, thx) - the more likely they won&#x27;t have as many kids as in previous generations (Due to their biological clocks).<p>Of course, it is always going to be down to individual will power and personality, but I am stating from common person&#x27;s perspective.
评论 #25895896 未加载
评论 #25894495 未加载
评论 #25894779 未加载
评论 #25894561 未加载
hermitcrabover 4 years ago
A gradual decline in human population is surely a good thing? The change in demographics will cause problems. But significantly less than the problems caused by unending population growth, which could lead to rampant climate change, environmental collapse, mass migration and war.<p>Also different countries are in different situations. The rich, ageing countries can allow immigration from poorer countries whose populations are still growing.
评论 #25894950 未加载
评论 #25894782 未加载
评论 #25896130 未加载
评论 #25894534 未加载
dasudasuover 4 years ago
&gt;<i>A vision of the future, perhaps, in a post-peak world: smaller populations crowding ever more tightly into urban centres. And outside, beyond the city limits, the wild animals prowling.</i><p>That seems inevitably tied to the increasing specialization and efficiency of agriculture. What was the original reason for humans to spread out in rural area, if not to get some farming land for yourself? Economic activity isn&#x27;t much tied to land use anymore. It&#x27;s seems hard to fathom any reason why would humans just go back to rural areas if not for some unforeseen technology to make this sensible, considering all the advantages living close to large metropolitan areas provide – and no, WFH isn&#x27;t it.
评论 #25894194 未加载
评论 #25894238 未加载
评论 #25894286 未加载
评论 #25894199 未加载
jgiliasover 4 years ago
The effects of climate change absolutely have to be taken into account when modelling population dynamics around the world, but this is almost never done.<p>I would really like to see a model that as a minimum includes the effects of all of the following:<p>* Water stress<p>* Effects of a prolonged forest fire season in Southern Europe<p>* Temperature increases<p>* Climate change effects on coastal communities<p>Also ease of migration between places should be taken into account. The population models I see usually are limited to &quot;birthrate in this country is projected to be this number, therefore population is projected to change in this way&quot;. Which seems to be much too simplistic to me.
评论 #25895946 未加载
CapitalistCartrover 4 years ago
My wife and I (USA) have a son we adopted. He has state-supplied medical insurance, without which we couldn&#x27;t have.<p>Want people to have children? How about being able to live near extended family because of a robust economy? How about maternity &amp; paternity leave that aren&#x27;t dependant on employer? How about teaching children being a respected career? How about laws with teeth requiring employers to respect employee work&#x2F;life balance, private life?
markvdbover 4 years ago
Latvia went approximately -30% in 30 years, from 2.66<i>10^6 in 1990 to 1.894</i>10^6 in 2020. Further decreases are expected to bring this to under 1.5*10^6 in 2050.<p>These numbers are massive, _and_ they underestimate the change in the countryside and smaller cities. Many don&#x27;t even bother unregistering from their native country when emigrating. There is also massive internal migration of youth to the capital Riga. That&#x27;s the main reason the capital&#x27;s population is more or less stable...
gumbyover 4 years ago
It&#x27;s really hard for me to get upset by this. If people want fewer children, great!<p>Yes, I understand the pyramid problem of caring for people who can no longer care for themselves, but socializing it (i.e. no leaving the burden to fall directly on the adult children, taking them out of the workforce) is ignored or condemned in most OECD countries. And increasing automation and efficiency should free more people do do these caring tasks, and reduce cost of living.
mapgrepover 4 years ago
I thought these were some very eye opening stats:<p>“ there are 1.97 cars per U.S. household, but in Des Moines, Iowa, there are 19 parking spaces per household. In Jackson, Wyoming, there are 27. “<p>The article goes on to discuss how parking lots are major opportunity sites for housing development, especially in suburbs. This worked well in downtown Oakland, where from ~1998-2008 there were 10k units built, many on former parking lots. This has the benefit of reducing gentrification impacts.
评论 #25896031 未加载
tsssover 4 years ago
There is no problem here. We should be happy that this unsustainable all-consuming population growth is slowly coming to an end. Not having children is by far the best thing you can do for the environment and the world as a whole.
评论 #25896190 未加载
baneover 4 years ago
When I was a teenager my family decided to dedicate one of our preciously few vacation to visiting my father&#x27;s hometown. It was a town that was built and existed for two things: farming and oil. The oil dried up two generations ago and it threw the town into poverty and disrepair. My father escaped to &quot;the city&quot;, the Army, college and a better life. His siblings and other relatives held on for as long as they could until eventually the entire clan of dozens had left or passed away. For decades they refused to contact or talk to my father, thinking him a &quot;traitor to the family&quot; with his fancy college degree and overseas adventures. From time to time two of his brothers would keep in touch, the common thread to their story was time spent in the military and overseas as well.<p>The town was a ruin. Beautiful turn of the 20th century facades were crumbling, what was once a bustling town square was overgrown and had an abandoned truck left in the middle of it. The roads were in disrepair. All commerce of any kind had moved to another town a few miles away and existed solely of a couple eateries, a drug store, a small bank, and some farm supply stores.<p>We drove aimlessly around as my father explained what this piece of abandoned oil pumping equipment was for or about some childhood adventure he had had pushing one of his polio paralyzed brothers around in his wheelchair or how they had engaged in minor industry to make the $.05 for an ice cream. Rather than a fond trip through nostalgia, the crumbling and abandoned state of the area was hard on him.<p>These areas that are both economically depressed and depopulating slide into poverty, drug dependency, and most recently pointless, embarrassing, and dangerous political radicalization. Industry is not coming back to these place, the oil is dried up, the mill has shut down, the mine is all dug out, and so on. People stay because of memories and family and sometimes &quot;history and heritage&quot;. In the case of my father they chose to shame him for decades for abandoning them. It&#x27;s kind of cult-like in a way.<p>It seems simple to solve, move! Migrate to where the jobs are. But beyond these emotional circumstances that nail people to these failing areas, there is a difficult monetary restraint. It&#x27;s expensive to move elsewhere, especially with an established multigenerational family. It means abandoning functioning domiciles, maybe vehicles or even business relationships with no guarantee of success.<p>We pay people to stay where they are, even if there&#x27;s no long-term prospect, but I would support a &quot;Move America!&quot; program that offered some kind of incentive for people to move to areas with better economic outlook. This means cities for the most part.<p>Both parties don&#x27;t want this because this means a massive transformation in the politics of the urban&#x2F;rural divide.
评论 #25894284 未加载
评论 #25894588 未加载
评论 #25895083 未加载
评论 #25896743 未加载
评论 #25894247 未加载
评论 #25899441 未加载
评论 #25897977 未加载
评论 #25897326 未加载
djohnstonover 4 years ago
This seems like great news. In the face of our collective inability to do anything about climate change, if we could cut our current population by 2100 it might help with the crop failures and such.
评论 #25897296 未加载
ardy42over 4 years ago
&gt; But what does population decline look like on the ground? The experience of Japan, a country that has been showing this trend for more than a decade, might offer some insight. Already there are too few people to fill all its houses – one in every eight homes now lies empty. In Japan, they call such vacant buildings akiya – ghost homes.<p>&gt; Most often to be found in rural areas, these houses quickly fall into disrepair, leaving them as eerie presences in the landscape, thus speeding the decline of the neighbourhood. Many akiya have been left empty after the death of their occupants; inherited by their city-living relatives, many go unclaimed and untended. With so many structures under unknown ownership, local authorities are also unable to tear them down.<p>It doesn&#x27;t help that the Japanese have a strong bias against old&#x2F;used homes, so land with a home on it is worth less than a vacant lot (because you have to factor in the cost of demolishing the existing home). I&#x27;m speculating, but that would probably also lead to houses that aren&#x27;t built to last, and thus fall into disrepair more quickly.
chaostheoryover 4 years ago
The issue is that male fertility and testosterone keeps falling consecutively every year in developed countries. We don’t know why. If I were to guesss, it’s due to the use of plastics with our food. Even without extremes of temperature, research has found that plastic will leech synthetic hormones like BPA (synthetic estrogen) and BPS. This is making its way into almost all of our food and drink<p>On the bright side, the threat of overpopulation is lessened
评论 #25894186 未加载
评论 #25894312 未加载
评论 #25894605 未加载
评论 #25894215 未加载
评论 #25894202 未加载
评论 #25894478 未加载
评论 #25896047 未加载
评论 #25898023 未加载
评论 #25894647 未加载
aseboldover 4 years ago
I think a lot of people expect the rise in working from home to fix this problem but it’s more than that. Rural areas need access to affordable broadband internet, and more industries need to embrace remote work. I think an overall decline in population is good but the remaining population needs to be properly dispersed to see any real benefit from it. And that’s going to require intentional support and intervention from government.
评论 #25894446 未加载
grapecookieover 4 years ago
People choosing not to replace themselves is a strong indicator that we are failing to thrive.
newdude116over 4 years ago
Lets worry about Corona and protect the &gt;70year old childless boomers.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;bleppyman&#x2F;status&#x2F;1351286077823324160" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;bleppyman&#x2F;status&#x2F;1351286077823324160</a>
lanevorockzover 4 years ago
As The Guardian always have an addiction for pushing a narrative. In the real world, population is still growing by 80 million per year and the plateau is calculated at 20 billion.<p>The fact is that the poorer a country is, the more likely is for families to have more kids to raise their chances in life. Population in western world is certainly declining and relying on immigration to keep numbers sustainable.
评论 #25894366 未加载