this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
77 points (97.5% liked)

World News

39184 readers
2301 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A research institute of the Bank of Korea (BOK) said Sunday that Korea may be forced to record negative economic growth in the 2040s unless the nation improves its productivity, as its working-age population is rapidly shrinking.

In a report, the BOK's Economic Research Institute expected Korea's economy to grow some 2.1 percent in the 2020s and some 0.6 percent in the 2030s but to shrink some 0.1 percent in the 2040s.

The assessment by Cho Tae-hyung, vice head of the institute, was based on an assumption that Korea may fail to improve its productivity to make up for a decline in the working-age population.

If Korea improves its productivity to cope with a demographic change, the report predicted that the nation's economy would grow some 2.4 percent in the 2020s, some 0.9 percent in the 2030s and some 0.2 percent in the 2040s.

"It is most important to keep productivity growth to mitigate future slowdowns in economic growth," Cho said in the report.

The BOK has recently projected Korea's economy to grow 1.4 percent for all of 2023, down from a 2.6 percent expansion in 2022. (Yonhap)

all 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] oDDmON 40 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There’s nothing wrong with periods of static or negative economic activity.

In the natural world the only thing I know of that’s always growing, is cancer.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

This is true, but it's not like South Korea will just be producing slightly less consumer goods. Their population will soon be majority senior citizens. These seniors need people to provide and care for them. I've read estimates that even if every working South Korean quit their job and became a nurse, there still wouldn't be enough nurses to care for the elderly population. Of course, every single worker in a country being a nurse would be a terrible idea, but it just goes to show how lopsided their demographics are.

The biggest issue here is that, ironically, South Korea's older population is staunchly against any and all forms of immigration. South Korea isn't the only country filled with old people, but they're one of the only ones that refuse to import young people from other countries in order to balance things out.

These studies warning of collapsing economies are a way to try and persuade South Korea's old people to allow immigration before their country collapses.

[–] highenergyphysics 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They’ve really done it to themselves. Worked up into a religious fervor wishing the days of the 70s dictators would come back, where the disabled, dissenting students, and activists were rounded up and killed wholesale.

And before the chuds roll in, yes I have personally seen this. It’s almost universal with the older demographic.

These are people that worship the dictators of old to this day, keeping massive portraits of them in their homes.

Working the younger generations to death and keeping all the profits their labor generated. They have miraculously speedrun capitalism in two generations. Went from subsistence farmers to gleaming cities to complete societal collapse in 50 years. Fascinating.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

They haven't collapsed yet. This is a warning, not a prophecy.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

once their population crashes in a decade or so it'll probably be really rough for another decade before they bounce back. Samsung/LG's days are numbered though, unless they start offshoring everything now

[–] afraid_of_zombies 3 points 11 months ago

Your analogy is false and in practice you are talking about real human beings that are going to have years of their life taken from them in stagnation. But hey prove that there is nothing wrong with it. Go take the worst low paying job you can find right now.

[–] AdamEatsAss 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Wouldn't constant positive evonomic growth be unsustainable unless you have constant population growth?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yep.

So far everyone has just expected that to be someone else's problem in the future and had zero interest in planning for it.

[–] youngGoku 6 points 11 months ago

Yeah the "free market" will work itself out /s

USA is facing a similar problem with boomers retiring.

[–] Webster 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Constant productivity growth could allow it without constant population growth, as long as products growth exceeds impacts from population decline. This report is basically saying they don't see that happening.

[–] AdamEatsAss 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I'm no economist but doesn't productivity have a maximum? On top of that wouldn't demand also have a maximum for a given population? At some point it'd hit steady state.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 2 points 11 months ago

Don't worry economists don't know anything

[–] Webster 0 points 11 months ago

It depends on what you feel about the future of technology. Most productivity growth comes from advances in technology. We haven't hit a maximum yet, so it's a question of if you think technology will or won't enable us to do more in the same amount of time for the indefinite future.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

The ROK is sacrificing long-term growth (by mandating set work hours and increasing fertility) for short-term growth.