[lmm]

> They need _someone_ (or something, if they can manage) to sustain the way of life they hold so dear.

They don't though? Pensions will be cut. Retirements will be pushed back. Grandparents with dementia will be kept mostly-alive in their children's homes rather than getting proper care. There will be pain and suffering. But I don't see any of that pushing the country to breaking point.

> And it's not something a country can just decide on a whim like "oop looks like we really need more people tomorrow folks". What are they going to do? Import millions of people 18 years from now? Or plan ahead to make sure millions of babies are born now to grow into the people they like 18 years from now?

As hard as fixing a low population is, it's easier than fixing a society where trust has broken down, which is what the western countries that went hard on immigration are already starting to face.

[auyez]

Also different cultures can withstand different level of hardships. With population decline what kind of quality of life drop we are talking about? Even if people get 2 times poorer, it is still way above than whatever people had in old times. That level can easily drop way further and people can adapt.

I think it is even better to not have immigration as a solution, because it accelerates this whole problem and forces the society to search for other ways to solve the issue.

[vachina]

Yeah not sure why you’re being downvoted. Work hard on making elderly care as easy as possible, automate automatable things. Importing people is just kicking the ageing population can down the road; these immigrant will grow old one day, and then what, import even more people?

[bulbar]

People from other cultures tend to have more babies.

[lmm]

For one generation, maybe. Once they've assimilated even a little (which is usually what you want, right?) they revert to the same birthrate as everyone else.