
By 2030, 56 countries will have more people aged 65+ than children under 15 - petethomas
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-11/more-old-than-young-a-population-plague-spreads-around-the-globe
======
AlexB138
When I read things like this, I can't help but feel like we're approaching The
Behavioral Sink. When I first read about John B. Calhoun's work, I thought it
was interesting but sort of moved on. For some reason, it stuck in my mind
though, and it rises to the surface often when I read news about the world.

For those who don't know, Calhoun's research was around the impact of
population growth. He found that mice in a closed environment, among other
behaviors, became anti-social, violent, strangely obsessed with grooming and
stopped breeding once the population reached a certain size, even disregarding
the wellbeing of the young that are born.

Obviously we're not in a situation as bad as all that, but it's an interesting
light to view today's world in.

~~~
Derpdiherp
The mice utopia experiment.. There are a surprising amount of small parallels
between it and some of our recent cultural phenomenon.

Interesting thought.

~~~
thechao
Would you mind elaborating? My great grandmother used to laugh at the moral
majority's antics---she said that people have been complaining about the moral
degeneration of society since she was a small child---in the 1890s.

~~~
Derpdiherp
"Newer generations born in the now dysfunctional mouse utopia became
withdrawn, spending their days grooming obsessively and dedicating their time
solely to eating , drinking and sleeping. This generation, for all the
emphasis they placed on grooming, would not reproduce. Moreover, these mice
were noted to be unintelligent compared to previous generations."

Intelligence has surely risen in our population, obesity is becoming a real
problem in successful populations. The "selfie" self absorbed cultural shift
we're seeing at the moment is another parallel.

Whilst we're not cannibalising each other or becoming any more aggressive than
we have been in the past (although we are still plenty aggressive), I think we
are starting to see some of symptoms for lack of a better term that are
highlighted above to some degree or another.

Edit - perhaps there are also similarities between the hikikomori NEET
lifestyle that's arisen in Japan as well.

This is purely an opinion without any statistics to back it up though, I'd be
interested to hear counter arguments.

~~~
projektir
Getting obese seems like the opposite of excessive grooming. Most of the
tendencies you're talking about are not happening in the overpopulated areas.
The selfie thing is hugely overblown, a lot of people may be self-absorbed,
but what says that's new, and a lot of people are also depressed.

The mice thing is not a utopia, it's an extremely artificial situation that
only fits a very banal and shallow definition of "utopia". And that is not and
probably never will be a situation humans will find themselves in since it
requires a third party to engineer. None of us right now are in a closed
environment, and we're definitely not in a no scarcity situation, since people
are still worried about holding a job. The NEET thing is, too, related to the
whole job thing.

In what way are these situations at all related?

~~~
Derpdiherp
I think you're reading into the term "utopia" too much. The experiment was a
utopia of the body perhaps where there are no biological needs that aren't
satisfied with no external forces of nature acting to reduce population aside
from the size of the habitat that the rats lived in - as you mention we do not
live in a utopia as people do grow hungry and are lacking jobs.

It also was not a utopia because the rats clearly where not happy.

I'd disagree and say that in overpopulated areas there is a higher rate of
depression, obesity and psychological problems than in places with lower
populations - but I haven't provided numbers there and neither have you - so
both of our arguments are anecdotal.

As an aside I was more referencing the hikikomori phenomenon when I mentioned
NEET's - whilst they are NEET, they are extreme cases of social withdrawl and
other mental problems.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikikomori](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikikomori)

~~~
hx87
> I'd disagree and say that in overpopulated areas there is a higher rate of
> depression, obesity and psychological problems than in places with lower
> populations

What scope and scale are you looking at though? Because within first world
countries such as the USA, psychological problems doesn't correlate much and
obesity correlates negatively with population density. The problems you
mention correlate much more with social and economic opportunities (or lack
thereof) than population density itself.

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3481194/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3481194/)

~~~
Derpdiherp
Thanks very much for the paper, I'm always more than happy to be proved wrong,
I'll have a read.

------
Derpdiherp
Surely this is a good thing? We (as a species) have been growing exponentially
in an unsustainable manner. It'll be tough as we transition into looking after
more elderly with less of a young population to support them - but in the long
run it's for the best.

~~~
s_kilk
One huge downside would be that older people tend to skew to the more
conservative end of the political spectrum, and can end up drowning out the
voices of the young.

See the age breakdown of the recent Brexit vote for one example. I also
remember with the Irish referendum on gay marriage in 2015, there was much
worry that the older generations would swing the overall vote to "No", despite
the legislation having no impact on them.

Worth thinking about: How many Brexit "Leave" voters have simply died of old
age in the two months between then and now?

~~~
pc86
> _One huge downside would be that older people tend to skew to the more
> conservative end of the political spectrum_

Only a downside if you (a) disagree with them; (b) for whatever reason, feel
they are not entitled to their beliefs

> _and can end up drowning out the voices of the young._

Funny how when your opinions are the majority it's democracy, and when they're
not it's "voices being drowned out."

> _Worth thinking about: How many Brexit "Leave" voters have simply died of
> old age in the two months between then and now?_

It's not.

~~~
cmdrfred
You are correct if everyone gets to vote. If the elderly with little to do all
day have an easier time getting to the polls than the working class single mom
supporting them, then you have a problem. I say make election day a national
holiday _. The AARP likely disagrees.

_ You don't even have to do that, I'd make July 4th election day in the states
for example.

~~~
nradov
While I don't particularly like the AARP, they haven't said anything against
making voting day a national holiday. And with voting by mail it's totally
unnecessary anyway. In CA now even postage is free so there are zero obstacles
preventing the working class from voting.

~~~
shostack
Except there are issues with it. For example, I ordered my ballot and never
received it. Fortunately I work somewhere with a flexible enough schedule that
I could vote in person, but it isn't reliable enough for me.

There is really no compelling argument I can think of for why there shouldn't
be a federal holiday to vote, unless you are arguing about lost productivity
as a business owner or policy changes from more people of different
demographics voting. Neither are compelling arguments.

------
sdoering
Whenever I read things like this. I am reminded of Hans Rosling's "Global
population growth, box by box"[1].

The only question is, how to transition to a "steady state economy"[2][3] or
"non growth economies", when population really reaches some kind of
equilibrium. As growth is the only concept humans for the last tens of
thousands of years knew, this transition, while absolutely necessary, will be
hard and hurt lots of people I believe.

[1]:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTznEIZRkLg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTznEIZRkLg)
[2]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady-
state_economy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady-state_economy) [3]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrality_of_money](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrality_of_money)

~~~
3pt14159
A steady state economy will never, ever happen. We'll sooner extinguish our
planet. The reason is simple: technological progress is a national security
matter. It can't be stopped. Even coordinated treatise would be subverted.
With technological progress more and more output for the same amount of input
is possible.

Now you could argue for a steady state population. Or at least for a period of
time where we have a steady state population (before starships are prevalent)
and I could start to see that happening, but as long as there is intelligence
and peace the economy will continue to grow.

~~~
BatFastard
Knowledge will most likely grow, but with a steady population the only true
GDP growth can come from moving people out of poverty and into the higher
income brackets. Once everyone is there, what real growth is there?

~~~
snowwrestler
Even higher income brackets?

I don't know what you mean by "true" GDP growth. It feels like you're making
some non-standard distinction but not explaining it.

------
fwn
The only problem is probably the many funding models that assume otherwise,
therefore rely on an uneven age distribution with a bigger share of younger
participants (like many western pension funds, etc.)

While I can imagine that it's not easy to redesign pension funds, but keeping
the current systems at all costs is probably ideological by definition.

------
bArray
It's humanity correcting the growth rate - it's been well overdue, it's just
going to be tough for a little while but we'll manage. If anything, robots
could make this a lot better for us. People are relatively content in the West
and the rise in living costs are putting people off kids.

~~~
collyw
So far we have robots for doing the vacuuming. I don't see why everyone is so
optimistic that there things are just around the corner.

~~~
Joof
I think our robots that do manufacturing or driving are more sophisticated
than the ones that vacuum.

AI has hit a boom and is producing a lot of potentially useful achievements
(that it hadn't before). It wouldn't surprise me if they become more
prevelant.

Of course, we still need the resources to build them...

~~~
bArray
Exactly, people take for granted the AI that drives Siri and Google talk -
these are amazing advances. It's enabled family members who are dislexic to
completely transform their ability to engage in technology and the world.

Of course driverless cars are s massive feat and I see more robots entering
the house soon in less subtle ways.

~~~
collyw
I am curios, a lot of people talk about Siri on here, yet I have never seen
anyone use it in real life (I see plenty of iPhones). Does it only work well
with American style English (I am Scottish and am pretty sure the accent would
cause it problems).

~~~
bArray
Not sure, a lot of my family is London-ish area English and it works well for
them.

I think the detection algorithm will look past accent and probably do some
deep-learning based technique. Google are probably smart enough to tailor the
voice recognition algorithms geographically - if you spend time in Scotland it
will probably use the Scottish trained net to detect what you want.

------
skewart
But will 65 always be a meaningful cut-off for "old" \- if it even is today?
What would the balance look like if you made the cut-off 75, or 80, or 90?

Obviously current pension and retirement policy defines "old" at various ages
in the 50s or 60s, and 65 is a reasonable cut-off in light of current laws.
But the trend is generally longer lives and later retirements.

I would be willing to bet that the 65-year-olds of the 2030s will be much less
of a "burden" on society than, say, the 65-year-olds of the 1930s were.

~~~
ihsw
65+ across the board is most definitely a burden -- those entering old age
between now and 2030 are universally poor, underemployed, and in poor health,
and there is no sign of it slowing down or getting better. They will rely on
the young more than ever.

That said, 65 isn't a hard number. Many exit regular employment permanently at
50, for example.

A century ago and now are incomparable for a variety of reasons, one of them
being a burgeoning middle class. The birth of a middle class brings
incalculable improvements but many nations haven't ever adapted to that
massive middle class approaching old age, but thankfully this will be
staggered so we can respond to it gradually.

~~~
skewart
> those entering old age between now and 2030 are universally poor,
> underemployed, and in poor health, and there is no sign of it slowing down
> or getting better. They will rely on the young more than ever.

Could you elaborate on this? My impression is the exact opposite - that people
are generally healthier and/or living longer than they have previously.
Obviously things vary tremendously from country to country - and obesity in
the US complicates the picture - but is general health and life expectancy
around the world going down?

------
jkot
> _While the prospect of longer lives is a good thing, problems arise when a
> shrinking work force cannot foot the pension bill._

Not true.

In EU the retirement age is moving as population gets older. By 2040
retirement age could be around 75 years.

~~~
c3833174
Isn't it great?

Work almost all your life.

No more grandparents taking care of children while parents work, decreasing
the number of families that might have children.

Less open positions for young people.

~~~
tcoppi
Yeah, this sounds like a great recipe for a stable economic system and orderly
transition to steadier demographics over the next 20-50 years.

Edit: An informative graph for the bleak jobs picture for young people this
shift is creating in the US:
[http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/im...](http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2016/07/03/job%20additions%20total%20by%20age_0.jpg)

~~~
BatFastard
Zerohedge is not a reliable data source IMHO

~~~
tcoppi
It's straight from BLS data, throw it into something and graph it yourself if
you want
[http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t09.htm](http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t09.htm)

------
Falkon1313
>a shrinking work force cannot foot the pension bill [...]

>the political choices are unsavory — increase taxes or cut benefits

Those are not solutions, those would both exacerbate the problems. A shrinking
workforce, which has seen wages stagnating for decades while cost of living
continues to increase, and which is increasingly being automated out resulting
in high unemployment, cannot pay more taxes. That would result in even more
working people needing benefits (or dropping out of the workforce because it's
a net loss to work) and lower tax revenues. Cutting benefits would, of course,
directly increase the problems that occur when there already aren't enough
benefits to go around. And both of those 'solutions' would cause things to get
increasingly worse as the population ages and automation continues.

A possible solution would be increasing wages so that the workers, though
fewer in number, could pay more taxes and support more retirees and benefits.
Another would be decreasing the workweek, so that more people would have to be
hired, resulting in lower unemployment and more people paying taxes instead of
living on benefits. Both of those are also scalable, as the population ages
and automation increases, wages can be increased and hours decreased to
compensate. As a side benefit, workers with higher wages and more free time,
in addition to paying more taxes, could buy more, stimulating the economy,
resulting in even more tax revenues.

------
rahelzer
Any problem caused by an aging population cannot be a long-term problem.

~~~
tux1968
Unless it triggers an event that has lasting consequences beyond their
longevity.

------
Kristine1975
Title was changed to "More Old Than Young: A Demographic Shock Sweeps the
Globe". Guess someone realized that calling old people a plague wasn't the
best choice of words.

------
weatherlight
"While the prospect of longer lives is a good thing, problems arise when a
shrinking work force cannot foot the pension bill."

He underestimates the power of automation and the inevitable rise of a basic
universal income.

~~~
CaptSpify
He didn't say we can't do it, but that there are problems. Automation will
help, but it doesn't solve all of the problems associated.

~~~
weatherlight
"shrinking work force" he's not taking automation into account. Robots and
algorithm do indeed do work and do provide monetary value.

~~~
CaptSpify
> Robots and algorithm do indeed do work and do provide monetary value.

I'm not sure where anyone said otherwise. I'm just saying that automation
doesn't solve all of the problems here.

------
dominotw
can't these countries just import young people from India where more than 50%
of its population below the age of 25 and more than 65% below the age of 35.

------
pasbesoin
As societies, we've chosen to pay for old people -- not for kids.

You get what you pay for.

------
Practicality
If we can fix health problems this is no longer a problem. (Just saying). At
that point it's just a population issue.

