• WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Daycare/Kindergarten is already free across the country for all children starting at 3 years old.

    All child healthcare is also free after a prefecture-set monthly premium (usually about 1000 yen).

    This policy announcement is specifically about making the 0-3 year old gap free.

    Honestly I’d rather just see the government pay more into the shakai hoken (the national insurance that pays for mother/father leave) so people can take more time off from work early on in the kids’ lives.

    Making it easier for parents to go back to work instead of focusing what’s good for children and parents seems par for the course.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      The only solution is to make childcare paid i.e. every single person that has a child gets a stipend worth a full time job.

      Because it is a full time job.

  • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Decent first step, but it’s going to take an actual investment in making parenthood desirable.

    • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Parenthood is already desirable. There’s a biological drive and social conditioning to desire it for most people. The disincentives have just become overwhelming. Children take a hell of a lot of resources. Every aspect of modern society has drained all the time, money, energy, emotional resiliance, social support, etc that people need.

    • kalleboo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Housing is pretty affordable in Japan since housing in Japan is not an investment, it depreciates like a car (only the land has value, the house ontop of it has literally negative value since it’s assumed anyone will want to bulldoze it), and their lax zoning allows for continual densification to happen.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Only once in my life have I got my damage deposit back. That is tipping the landlord a lot of money. The time I got it back was in a terrible situation and I had leverage over the parasite.

      • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Usually the newer buildings owned by larger real estate groups don’t do they kept money thing anymore.

        I’ve only really seen it in buildings owned by small real estate concerns and old dudes.

        It’s luckily getting kind of pushed out as a normal thing, just slowly.

    • regul@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Housing in Tokyo is known for being relatively affordable, actually.

      • bountygiver [any]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        13 hours ago

        ya it’s funny when you watch some videos about “small apartments” in tokyo and only to realize they are still more cheaper and spacious than some NA options in big cities.

      • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Not in Tokyo, but farther out in Tokyo’s residential cities (outside the 23 wards like Chiba and Saitama)

        It’s even cheaper the farther you get from train stations. There’s a 30 minute walk “cliff” where residential land prices plummet when you’re more than 30 minutes walk away from a train station.

    • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Childcare is outrageous. Daycare for my two kids was more than my mortgage every month. Ive been counting down until they were eligible for public schools

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Damn, in Norway is not free, but both public and private kindergartens (1-6) are capped in terms of what they can bill for each month. Which is about 210usd

        The rest is paid for though taxes obviously.

      • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        Unfortunately for many of us Americans, there is a substantial contingent of our government that would really like to do away with public schools.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    What governments and corporations never understand and will never want to understand is that …

    … it isn’t about the quantity of life … or even the quantity of people who are alive or are born

    … it’s about the quality of life

    If everyone lives a comfortable, safe and fulfilling life without risk of poverty or losing everything they have, then they are more likely to have children and raise them to become productive people who will contribute to society.

    Otherwise if you don’t take care of people, they will either have no children or a bunch of children that will all grow up to become a burden to society.

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Maybe we should be less focused on making more people, and more focused on enabling living people to work together to meet each other’s needs?

      People will have children. But the only thing that pushes the nationalistic desires to have a positive birth rate is the zealotry around eternal 3%+ growth of financial product. That needs a growing consumer base.

      We could be achieving an economic degrowth while simultaneously increasing the standard of living. Instead we have tech billionaires, a venture capitalist class, and a war on women’s(as well everyone else’s) bodily autonomy.

    • kalleboo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      If everyone lives a comfortable, safe and fulfilling life without risk of poverty or losing everything they have, then they are more likely to have children and raise them to become productive people who will contribute to society.

      You would assume that, but is it really true? The countries with the safest and most comfortable lives, in Scandinavia, have the lowest birth rates. The countries with the least safe and comfortable lives, in Africa, have the highest birth rates.

      • ClamDrinker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        Well, countries with higher birthrates have a third option that is essentially negligible in those with lower birthrates, which is not even making it to adulthood. Effectively still less children end up becoming productive members of society. And together with that, due to less available social services, often a goal of having children survive is so they can take care of the parent when they’re older.

        As soon as infant mortality becomes a non-factor, birthrates decline drastically as well. And since children are no longer largely seen as a “life assurance” for when parents are older, and the society’s demands for productive members is higher as well, the focus really does shift to the quality of the life and the two types of reasons to have kids are harder to compare. But even among developed nations you can see differences in fertility rates.

        PS. Scandinavia doesn’t have the lowest birth rates, they actually have fairly typical birth rates for more developed regions.

    • chaos@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      13 hours ago

      “Life without risk of poverty”?! That desperation and fear is the only way I can staff my sweatshops!

    • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The way I’ve heard it said is “if you live in a developed country, you could probably afford to move to Japan right now. If you get a job in Japan, you’ll never afford to move back.”

      Japan’s cost of living is low compared to developed nations, but their average income is also low for a developed nation.

      • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        57 minutes ago

        When you move from the US you lose like half your salary for an equivalent position (more now cause of the relative power of the dollar to the yen).

        The people that live like kings are the ones that are in Japan at the behest of American companies on American salaries living at like a third of their American costs.

    • skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      13 hours ago

      rent is cheapish, it’s everything else that will get you. if you’re fine with crushing and all-permeating conformism, ridiculous degree of nationalism and misogyny, how you won’t be ever accepted as one of their own as foreigner and famously toxic work culture, feel free to give it a shot

  • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Affordable housing, better working conditions, less working hours, efficient healthcare and better pay. It’s not hard goddamn it.