1. Japan does not currently have a replacement birthrate.
2. Japan does have the longest-lived populace in the world.
3. Roughly a quarter of pregnancies in Japan are terminated.

Now, what if there were a program of heavily subsidized adoption program with big cash incentives for pregnant women who are unwilling mothers AND WITH the age limits for adopting parents raised past 60?

Retirees in Japan are generally well-off and have the time and energy to raise more children. Since the average Japanese lifespan is in the late 70′s and moving toward the 80′s, the child will most likely have his or her parent(s) live through high school or even college, by which time he or she is an independent adult. Culturally, this works well for Japan since the elderly are so well regarded.

This need not have racial restrictions, since it will be the adopting parent(s) who will specify details on the child they want to adopt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_birth_rate

While it’s not unusual that there’d be a few right-wing extremists such as this in any country, what’s unexpected is how many people agree with him. I confess myself disappointed.

Providing support to mothers and potential mothers may have a positive impact, though. The women who would have aborted the fetus on the grounds that they feel their careers would suffer might rethink their decision if taking care of the child became relatively easier.

Laws prohibiting pressured resignation and hiring discrimination for married women. (A major issue)

MORE THAN the 350,000 given to mother after child birth. (Read original post once more)

And, most importantly, free daycare services.

Thank you for your constructive criticism.

http://www.ipss.go.jp/p-info/e/S_D_I/Indip.html#t_10

If a fraction of these 300,000 aborted babies are given chance to live, the population projection will change dramatically.

“laws prohibiting companies from dismissing new mothers because of maternity leave.”
Japan already has such laws.

“the 300,000 yen they give to new parents after childbirth is good”
Right now, mothers can get 300,000 yen regardless of the outcome of the pregnancy (childbirth, miscarriage or abortion).

Thank you for your creativeness.

With this trend being stronger in some countries, and weaker in other countries, a decline in birth rate is happening all over the developing world. It seems to be a socioeconomic consequence of the escape from poverty and old-school conservative morals. Contraceptives of course only make this development possible.

I ask: Why is a shrinking population a BAD thing? We are slowly (?) running out of oil and other resources. With that in mind, will 120m Japanese and 300m Europeans be able to have even a similar standard of living in 50 or 100 years? Young Japanese women are much smarter than old Japanese politicians, in my eyes.

I just visited Tokyo last month (I live in the Japanese countryside), and I must say, there are already enough people there for my taste!

Women now effectively decide whether there will be a high or low birth rate.

Are you sure?
I sometimes notice English medias write that way.
Of all of the Japanese people I know of, a man and a woman decide together whether to marry, how many babies they want.

“In the past, the rate was higher because there was no birth control, and because women did not consider having a long career.
…
The only problem is that nobody is willing to tell women that they might need to give up the abortions and contraceptives and careers in order to have more kids.”

Why can’t they have a long career and children? If there were systems in place for support, it is entirely possible.

Absolutely! At least make it illegal to have mandatory “retirement” ages of 55 or 60 – ie, if you want to work after that you can only do so as a contract worker. These do still exist at many workplaces.

You all know, however, that the real factor in the birth rate is always _women_. Women now effectively decide whether there will be a high or low birth rate.

In the past, the rate was higher because there was no birth control, and because women did not consider having a long career. Those are just facts. It is incontrovertible that if these trends were reversed, the birth rate would be higher. One need only look at the muslim world to see that this is indeed the case.

So the proposed solutions are not laugable, as some of you suggest, but rather, are exactly what we know would work! The only problem is that nobody is willing to tell women that they might need to give up the abortions and contraceptives and careers in order to have more kids.

Fundamentally, who can blame women for not wanting to have many kids? It’s hard baring them and it’s hard raising them. It’s great, if you’re tough, but it’s damn hard. If women, in any society, can choose to do whatever they wish with no social pressures, who can be surprised that they will then choose to have fewer children?

Boy, lefties sure are open-minded to the possibility that people besides themselves might have valid opinion…

What we’re all thinking: GREAT PICTURE POST!

Done and done.

Since the current retirement age of 65 in the USA was basically set back when the average life expectancy was 65, the whole system was based on the fact that half the people paying into the pension system would be DEAD and not get anything.

Now the life expectancy is what 75? 77? and in Japan it’s even worse! The highest life expectancy in the world AND a low retirement age of 60!

Solution that will never happen: Raise the retirement benefits age to the life expectancy age again.

France especially is coming to grips with its cultural identity problem: the people having the most babies in France aren’t French and don’t act like the French people do. France, perhaps more than even Japan, is very protective of its national culture and traditions, and is having difficulty with this situation.

People don’t want to have babies because it isn’t convenient to do so financially, temporally, or socially. The government is trying to coerce the population to make babies through a message of civil duty, but it should be looking for better methods of support instead. In this I think JFK was wrong – Ask not what you can do for your government, but what your government can do for you. “Civil servant” very much describes what they should be, but in Japan’s case that is definitely not what they are.

Here’s one idea for the government, free of my consulatation service fees: Promote free nursery services provided by companies as perks for working mothers, mandatory maternity leave for at least 3 months post-labor, and laws prohibiting companies from dismissing new mothers because of maternity leave. Also, the 300,000 yen they give to new parents after childbirth is good (We got our check!), but why not allocate funds from civil construction projects and invest in medical-fee support for pregnant women?

One problem with the Japanese government is that it’s an old-boys club, and politicians are so far removed from “normal society” that they have no idea of what citizens want.

One wonders how many of the working women in Japan would like to have children, but realize the moment they do their careers are over.

Surprised that no one mentions that women (and men) are getting married later. In many jobs, once you get married you are expected to “retire”. A young school teacher who spends four years at university might get to work all of 4-5 years before being pushed out.

Why would you want to?

I think he missed the “radical & final solution for those citizens who are sterile”

Reminds me a little of the Dihydrogen Monoxid story. DHMO, is responsible for so many death and is so dangerous.. That several very serious law makers where thinking of forbidding its usage..
For those who don’t know DHMO is .. H2O, pure, simple water given a scary little acronym.

Never too careful with weird suggestions handled by good & convincing public speakers.

P-A

But right-wing nuts don’t listen to logic, even cynical logic. [But then, left-wing nutjobs don't listen, either.]

Even if there were a doubling of the birth-rate, we wouldn’t see them hit the labor market for another 20 years. Far too late.

I’m just surprised he doesn’t propose further genetic research so that the DNA of half-foreign embryos can have their “undesireable” non-Nihonjin traits removed. >:(