CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research

Multimedia

En Español

Em Português

Other Languages

Home Publications Blogs Beat the Press Washington Post Gives Scary Demographic Story About Japan, Again

Washington Post Gives Scary Demographic Story About Japan, Again

Print
Sunday, 29 April 2012 16:20

The Washington Post has a practice of running a story ever month or so about Japan facing a demographic nightmare because its population is living longer. The idea is that this will impoverish the nation's youth, imposing a crushing burden for caring of the elderly. Of course those who know arithmetic know better.

This month's feature began by telling readers:

"The ominous demographics of this aging nation have long been seen by Japanese as a distant concern, not a present-day one. But that mind-set is being called into question by a prime minister who says that a crisis requiring immediate sacrifices has already begun.

In recent months, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda has staked his job and bet his support on a tax increase designed to fund Japan’s soaring social security costs.

And the potential tax hike is only a sneak preview of the burdens to come as Japan grows into the world’s grayest society, a nation where two decades from now seniors will outnumber children 15 and younger by nearly 4 to 1.

Economists and government officials say that Japan, in the coming years, will probably raise the retirement age, again increase taxes and trim spending on everything from education to defense, all to care for its elderly.

Young Japanese — those entering the workforce amid two decades of stagnation — will face the greatest burden: They will earn less in real terms than their parents, pay higher pension premiums, receive fewer social services and, eventually, retire with a less-generous pension package."

Okay, let's unpack this one a bit. First, by every measure Japan's economy is operating far below its potential capacity. Why on earth does it need tax increases to pay for anything right now? This makes zero sense.

Japan can simply continue doing what it has been doing, running large deficits and having it central bank finance them by buying up government bonds.

Is there a problem with this? Japan has been seeing deflation for much of the last two decades. The interest rate on 10-year government bonds is hovering near 1.0 percent.

If Prime Minister Noda is arguing that the country needs to raise taxes he either does not understand economics or has a hidden agenda that the Post article did not discuss. In the current economic situation it is quite obvious that there is no need whatsoever to raise taxes. A tax increase would actually hurt the economy by reducing demand and employment.

Let's consider the longer term issue. According to OECD data, productivity growth in Japan has been increasing at the rate of 1.8 percent a year over the last two decades. If this continues, output per worker will be 150 percent higher in 2050 than it was in 2000.

If the ratio of workers to retirees falls roughly 3 to 1 over this period to roughly 1 to 1, as the article tells us, and the pension system provides Japan's workers with a pension equal to 50 percent of the income of the average worker (Social Security benefits equal 40 percent of the average wage) then the after Social Security tax wage will be roughly 80 percent higher in 2050 than it is today.

If we look at the issue more closely, this almost certainly understates the likely gains. First, as the work force shrinks productivity growth is likely to accelerate. This would occur for two reasons. First, the least productive jobs (e.g. the midnight shift at the 7-11) will simply go unfilled, thereby raising average productivity.

The other reason is that a smaller population will reduce pressure on the natural environment and infrastructure. If the population declines by 50 percent, then the share of the population who will be able to live in houses with ocean views will double. Also traffic jams will be much less serious, trains will be less crowded and people will have to spend much less time commuting. Some of these gains are likely not to be included in official statistics since they are not designed to pick up these sorts of quality improvements.

Also, it is likely that the share of the population that is employed will increase. This will be both true among the under 65 population, as more women enter the workforce, and also many healthy older Japanese may decide to work later in life. If Japan can achieve that same employment to population ratio among its age 16-64 population as Iceland has today, this pace of productivity growth would allow after-tax living standards to double over the years from 2000-2050.

Finally, the issue about trimming spending on education may seem less of a concern when we remember that the whole story is that number of children in Japan is plummeting. Why wouldn't Japan trim spending in education. In short, this means that the tax increases needed to fund a larger population of retirees will be in part offset by the lower taxes needed to support a smaller population of children.

In short, there is not really a plausible story whereby a declining population will cause future generations of Japanese to be poorer than the current generation. Of course inept economic management could well bring about this result, but that is a very different story.  

Comments (6)Add Comment
The real lesson from Japan
written by Robert, April 29, 2012 7:37
One reason the Japanese people will get to experience gains from a less crowded labor market, reduced pollution and traffic, and less spending needed on education and overcrowded classrooms is that for years it has had a policy of very low immigration. Instead it's become more productive by becoming a leader in automation and robotics and giving higher wages to its own citizens. Japan should serve as a simple reality check to bust a lot of economic myths. This includes not only warnings about bond vigilantes from the right but also similarly ridiculous warnings from the left about our economic "need" for millions of additional workers in a time of already massive inequality and unemployment.
...
written by Andrew Clearfield, April 29, 2012 8:37
You're comparing apples and oranges when you say that productivity is going up so this will cancel out a lot of the increasing cost to the government of providing the additional services that all the old people will need. As Krugman pointed out on his blog just yesterday, in America at least, productivity gains lead to stagnant incomes for everyone except the super rich. If this is how it works in Japan too (and I confess I don't know) then unless the Japanese decide to enact a much more progressive tax format increased productivity will be of little help in paying for the changing demographics.
(http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.c...vity-went/)

Also, at the risk of sounding like an asshole, since you provide this great service to us every day, I would nonetheless like to echo the comment made on your last post about the quotation marks.(Because it's confusing!) Just to be clear in case you weren't aware, when reproducing a quote that goes for multiple paragraphs you do it like this:

Paragraph 1: "Blah blah blah.

Paragraph 2: "Blah, blah, blah.

Paragraph 3: "Blah, blah, blah."

(In other words, new quotation mark at the start of each paragraph.)
Washington Post Gives Scary Demographic Story About Japan, Again
written by Anna, April 30, 2012 3:17
Nice article, thanks for the information.

Anna @ http://www.griyamobilkita.com
Higher productivity does not solve the demographic challenge in egalitarian societies
written by anders h, April 30, 2012 9:37
If a society has a social contract about giving everybody a fair share of the growth from higher productivity, then higher productivity per definition does not solve the coming demographic imbalances of fewer in working year compared to children and elderly. This is the case in a number of European countries. I don't know about Japan

Dean assumes that the elderly of the future will fall behind the working population in income, even though that they would be rich by todays standards.

A further dilemma comes from the fact, that higher wealth generally leads to higher demand for health care services (which are highly labor intense and subject to Baumol's law about lower productivity growth in services) AND a demand for lower working hours which again lowers the taxbase.



WaPo not interested in "facts"
written by Matt, April 30, 2012 8:16
This sort of nonsense isn't published by WaPo and friends based on "facts" - it's simply reiterating an article of their religion, like singing a hymn in church. They've been praying at the altar of "destroy Social Security" since way back when Raygun was making records about how Medicare would lead to Communism...
...
written by JohnT, May 01, 2012 1:33
The NYT had a story on a failing rural Japanese town, Yubari. See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02...sacre.html

The next day it had a story on how marvelous failing farmland is for trees on the American Plains. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/30/us/amid-rural-decay-trees-take-root-in-silos.html?_r=1

It is an interesting story, but it makes it sound like it is advances in the economy (latifundias?) and not the impoverishment of farmers. And it has wonderous, though unexpected, results.

In Japan, though, an aging population is bad.

Write comment

(Only one link allowed per comment)

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.

busy
 

CEPR.net
Support this blog, donate
Combined Federal Campaign #79613

About Beat the Press

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of several books, his latest being The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive. Read more about Dean.

Archives