0001Capital Region Tiger ★.Sep. 11, 2024 (Wed) 10:51:49.19ID:0VS16qF69
On September 10, the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) released “Education at a Glance 2024.” Andreas Schleicher, director of the OECD’s Education and Skills Directorate, who held a press conference on the same day, once again criticized the low level of education spending in Japan’s government, a topic that has long been pointed out. “Japan’s share of education in public spending is low, third from the bottom (see chart above). So what does Japan spend its money on? Social security, health, and general public services. Japan is investing more in the past generation, the elderly, rather than in future generations. This may be natural, given the changing demographics of a declining birthrate and aging population. However, in Switzerland, which is experiencing the same trend of a declining birthrate and aging population, the proportion of government spending on education is twice that of Japan. For the full text, see the source. Last updated: 9/11 (Wed) 10:41 ★1 2024/09/11 (Wed) 09:02:05.01 Previous thread.
>>1 > Why does the Japanese government only invest in the elderly? When you become an elderly person, don’t complain if you are treated coldly by the younger generation or if you don’t receive public support.
>>1 That’s not true 😡 Why does the Japanese government invest in rural areas that are full of old people? The regions can’t be revitalized by handing out money to the elderly. It’s all the fault of the LDP Diet members, who have an unfair disparity in votes between urban areas and the elderly in terms of population ratio.
The reason we have accepted tax increases is to ensure the survival of Japan in the future. Ignoring the declining birthrate is the same as abandoning the Japanese people and paying taxes for future immigrants.
A country where the average age of voters is 59 years old Since democracy is about fulfilling the wishes of voters, it’s only natural that the elderly will be given preferential treatment That’s democracy.
In 1950, there were 12.1 working-age people supporting 1.0 elderly person. As of 2021, the population ratio is 2.1 people, and in 2065 the projected population ratio is 1.3 people supporting 1.0 elderly person. Even after the baby boomer generation and its juniors have disappeared, the accelerating decline in the birthrate will accelerate the increase in the aging rate. There is a need to undertake fundamental reforms to pensions, health insurance, and nursing care.
Even though it’s all a mess with lost decades and all that, there’s still the assumption that the higher-ups are doing the right thing with the money. They’re just saying that the higher-ups are paying it, and it’s not like they skim off the money and then it goes down to the lower levels. If the elderly and children are getting it properly, then there wouldn’t be any shortage of manpower and time on the ground.
First and foremost, it’s because of the Liberal Democratic Party. Measures to combat the declining birthrate will not only not win votes, but will actually be a negative.
If the elderly are a nuisance, we should make euthanasia possible. There are many elderly people who want to die, but they are afraid they can’t die on their own.
In Japan, the elderly are more motivated. Even the elderly who receive a decent pension are working. The young people say they don’t have money and don’t want to work. They’re taking it lightly.
>>31 The elderly today worked hard during the high economic growth period, so they’re not like the weak generation that blathers on about how important their own time is and that they want a job that doesn’t tire them out.
Comments