Singapore Has a Demographics Problem.

[Strong Eagle]

I was reading an article about how Russia has really screwed itself long term by sending such a large percentage of its more youthful population to Ukraine to get killed and maimed. Basically, there are so few younger people left that the future economic growth of the country is in jeopardy. Here's the population pyramid for Russia.



and the corresponding link:

https://www.populationpyramid.net/russi ... tion/2023/

Just for fun, I decided to take a look at Singapore's population pyramid. It seems that Singapore has a serious problem with birth rates that hasn't been adequately addressed in 20 years.



https://www.populationpyramid.net/singapore/2023/

It would seem to me that Singapore needs to start allowing a lot more immigrants with children into the country. It's probably not realistic to try and maintain the 70 percent Chinese ratio given the fear that PRC Chinese could take over the country, so that means lots more people from other Asian countries. But the authorities seem to be ignoring this serious long term problem... no young people to support the economy and the old people in the future.

I looked up the USA. It's basically a monolith... a stable population with birth rate just high enough to to ensure that the population stays stable... and that's with in migration that the right loves to hate.



https://www.populationpyramid.net/unite ... rica/2023/

And finally, I looked at India. It's a true pyramid with a broad base. What this means is that the population is increasing. And because the base is so broad, it also means a relatively high mortality rate.



https://www.populationpyramid.net/india/2023/

[Wd40]

The average Singaporean is 42 years old and the average Indian(from India) and Malaysian is 29 years old. That says a lot about how youthful(or unyouthful) the countries are.

[midlet2013]

Interesting data. There are few things I always wonder:

1. Despite a lack of children, raising children is not easy or affordable. In fact, everywhere you see, there is shortage of infrastructure. Foreign kids don't get schools which is ironical given the lack of children. Daycare is super expensive. Doctors always tell not to come unless urgent. So, the entire ecosystem to raise children seems highly constrained.

2. I was super surprised to see even Europe has a same problem. I was expecting people to more children given social security net and free education/healthcare. My thinking is that 50-60% of folks in most countries have to choose between 1+ kid or lifestyle. And hence most are choosing 1 kid. I am basing this of median net worth and salaries. Hard to see how people can support multiple kids while having a good lifestyle.

3 What is US doing that is right, other than immigration ? In immigration is what they are getting right, then why are others failing .

[NYY1]

There was a paper with population projections based on immigration scenarios a decade plus ago. Since, the country has more or less followed the 20k SC scenario (maybe a bit higher recently). Under this scenario, the SC population was set to top out at about 3.7 million, and the working age SC population may have already peaked / will decline slightly in the future. Increasing the new SCs to 25k will help both of these a bit (push total SC population to ~4 million and keep the working age SC population flattish). However, the old age dependency ratio is set to go to around 2.0 by 2030 in either case (and somewhat lower in the outer years).

In response to some other questions/comments, I think TFR has been declining pretty much everywhere (developed countries) over recent decades (although the Western nations still have higher absolute rates). For the US, the TFR and number of births have never fully recovered post-2008 after the financial crisis (TFR > 2.0 and > 4 million births). This is starting to show up in the population pyramid, although obviously it is much closer to stable.

I think the US has or has had a lot of land with people spread out, cheap housing (nationally, outside of the population centres), opportunity and mobility, and an economy that churns out both cheap goods and new better/cool stuff. Again, relatively speaking the TFR / number of births picture hasn't been trending (as) well in the last decade plus. It's possible there have been a couple of "one-time" factors drove this, and that things will recover (the US TFR was below 2.0 in the 70s and 80s and recovered after that). At the same time, there are probably some common factors (across many nations) that are putting pressure on these stats (at least relative to the past).

If interested, people can look at what's happened in Japan over the last couple of decades (working age population declined followed by a total population decline). I think it is probably best to look at stats in JPY terms.

[Wd40]

It would seem to me that Singapore needs to start allowing a lot more immigrants with children into the country. It's probably not realistic to try and maintain the 70 percent Chinese ratio given the fear that PRC Chinese could take over the country, so that means lots more people from other Asian countries.

Ever since Donald Trump became president and then the systematic trade war/competition against China and then COVID originating in China, over the last 7-8 years, the image of an Oriental Asian has gone down and the imagine of a South Asian has gone up during the same period.

Tables have turned, if you are an oriental Asian, Singapore is the only haven now, oriental Asians will face discrimination anywhere they go in the west.

Until now, Singapore had the awesome privilege they didn't need to choose sides. They could be western and be oriental Asian at the same time.

Temasek and GIC have huge amounts of investments in China and even though the west is derisking from China, Singapore is not, there is an identity crisis/issue.

It is interesting to follow how all this resolves itself.

[smoulder]

I was reading an article about how Russia has really screwed itself long term by sending such a large percentage of its more youthful population to Ukraine to get killed and maimed. Basically, there are so few younger people left that the future economic growth of the country is in jeopardy. Here's the population pyramid for Russia.



and the corresponding link:

https://www.populationpyramid.net/russi ... tion/2023/

Just for fun, I decided to take a look at Singapore's population pyramid. It seems that Singapore has a serious problem with birth rates that hasn't been adequately addressed in 20 years.



https://www.populationpyramid.net/singapore/2023/

It would seem to me that Singapore needs to start allowing a lot more immigrants with children into the country. It's probably not realistic to try and maintain the 70 percent Chinese ratio given the fear that PRC Chinese could take over the country, so that means lots more people from other Asian countries. But the authorities seem to be ignoring this serious long term problem... no young people to support the economy and the old people in the future.

I looked up the USA. It's basically a monolith... a stable population with birth rate just high enough to to ensure that the population stays stable... and that's with in migration that the right loves to hate.



https://www.populationpyramid.net/unite ... rica/2023/

And finally, I looked at India. It's a true pyramid with a broad base. What this means is that the population is increasing. And because the base is so broad, it also means a relatively high mortality rate.



https://www.populationpyramid.net/india/2023/

I'll be curious to see what the PRC pyramid looks like. From the reports, it would probably be somewhere between the US and Singapore and going towards Singapore. After decades of the 1 child policy, they can't seem to change the ships direction. It would be a balmy day in hell when they tried to correct through inward immigration, so that's not happening either.

[NYY1]

There was a paper with population projections based on immigration scenarios a decade plus ago. Since, the country has more or less followed the 20k SC scenario (maybe a bit higher recently). Under this scenario, the SC population was set to top out at about 3.7 million, and the working age SC population may have already peaked / will decline slightly in the future. Increasing the new SCs to 25k will help both of these a bit (push total SC population to ~4 million and keep the working age SC population flattish). However, the old age dependency ratio is set to go to around 2.0 by 2030 in either case (and somewhat lower in the outer years).

In response to some other questions/comments, I think TFR has been declining pretty much everywhere (developed countries) over recent decades (although the Western nations still have higher absolute rates). For the US, the TFR and number of births have never fully recovered post-2008 after the financial crisis (TFR > 2.0 and > 4 million births). This is starting to show up in the population pyramid, although obviously it is much closer to stable.

I think the US has or has had a lot of land with people spread out, cheap housing (nationally, outside of the population centres), opportunity and mobility, and an economy that churns out both cheap goods and new better/cool stuff. Again, relatively speaking the TFR / number of births picture hasn't been trending (as) well in the last decade plus. It's possible there have been a couple of "one-time" factors drove this, and that things will recover (the US TFR was below 2.0 in the 70s and 80s and recovered after that). At the same time, there are probably some common factors (across many nations) that are putting pressure on these stats (at least relative to the past).

If interested, people can look at what's happened in Japan over the last couple of decades (working age population declined followed by a total population decline). I think it is probably best to look at stats in JPY terms.

Just to add to the above, the assumed TFR in the report mentioned was 1.2. Since, TFR has pretty much been steadily declining towards 1.0 (i.e. assumption > reality, probably common among many prior reports/projections).

For reference, much of the world faces this challenge, albeit some countries are in better shape than others, relatively speaking. Here are some of the OCED projections for 2027 and 2050.

USA: 2.9 / 2.5
Australia: 3.0 / 2.4
Canada: 2.6 / 2.2
UK: 2.7 / 2.1
France: 2.4 / 1.8
Germany: 2.1 / 1.7
Italy: 2.2 / 1.3
Korea 2.9 / 1.3
Japan: 1.8 / 1.2

[midlet2013]

US,Aus,Canada, UK all seem to be in good shape. Could it be because they are English speaking and Immigration friendly. And 3 of them are really huge countries. I have lived in 3 small countries and I always feel that there is a lot of pressure on people regarding real estate etc. I think small countries are more stressful to live in.

So I think Size of the country,Ease of Immigration and Language play a factor too.

[midlet2013]

@NYY1
what do u do ? ur posts are often very analytical and data driven and logical.

There was a paper with population projections based on immigration scenarios a decade plus ago. Since, the country has more or less followed the 20k SC scenario (maybe a bit higher recently). Under this scenario, the SC population was set to top out at about 3.7 million, and the working age SC population may have already peaked / will decline slightly in the future. Increasing the new SCs to 25k will help both of these a bit (push total SC population to ~4 million and keep the working age SC population flattish). However, the old age dependency ratio is set to go to around 2.0 by 2030 in either case (and somewhat lower in the outer years).

In response to some other questions/comments, I think TFR has been declining pretty much everywhere (developed countries) over recent decades (although the Western nations still have higher absolute rates). For the US, the TFR and number of births have never fully recovered post-2008 after the financial crisis (TFR > 2.0 and > 4 million births). This is starting to show up in the population pyramid, although obviously it is much closer to stable.

I think the US has or has had a lot of land with people spread out, cheap housing (nationally, outside of the population centres), opportunity and mobility, and an economy that churns out both cheap goods and new better/cool stuff. Again, relatively speaking the TFR / number of births picture hasn't been trending (as) well in the last decade plus. It's possible there have been a couple of "one-time" factors drove this, and that things will recover (the US TFR was below 2.0 in the 70s and 80s and recovered after that). At the same time, there are probably some common factors (across many nations) that are putting pressure on these stats (at least relative to the past).

If interested, people can look at what's happened in Japan over the last couple of decades (working age population declined followed by a total population decline). I think it is probably best to look at stats in JPY terms.

Just to add to the above, the assumed TFR in the report mentioned was 1.2. Since, TFR has pretty much been steadily declining towards 1.0 (i.e. assumption > reality, probably common among many prior reports/projections).

For reference, much of the world faces this challenge, albeit some countries are in better shape than others, relatively speaking. Here are some of the OCED projections for 2027 and 2050.

USA: 2.9 / 2.5
Australia: 3.0 / 2.4
Canada: 2.6 / 2.2
UK: 2.7 / 2.1
France: 2.4 / 1.8
Germany: 2.1 / 1.7
Italy: 2.2 / 1.3
Korea 2.9 / 1.3
Japan: 1.8 / 1.2

[NYY1]

There was a paper with population projections based on immigration scenarios a decade plus ago. Since, the country has more or less followed the 20k SC scenario (maybe a bit higher recently). Under this scenario, the SC population was set to top out at about 3.7 million, and the working age SC population may have already peaked / will decline slightly in the future. Increasing the new SCs to 25k will help both of these a bit (push total SC population to ~4 million and keep the working age SC population flattish). However, the old age dependency ratio is set to go to around 2.0 by 2030 in either case (and somewhat lower in the outer years).

In response to some other questions/comments, I think TFR has been declining pretty much everywhere (developed countries) over recent decades (although the Western nations still have higher absolute rates). For the US, the TFR and number of births have never fully recovered post-2008 after the financial crisis (TFR > 2.0 and > 4 million births). This is starting to show up in the population pyramid, although obviously it is much closer to stable.

I think the US has or has had a lot of land with people spread out, cheap housing (nationally, outside of the population centres), opportunity and mobility, and an economy that churns out both cheap goods and new better/cool stuff. Again, relatively speaking the TFR / number of births picture hasn't been trending (as) well in the last decade plus. It's possible there have been a couple of "one-time" factors drove this, and that things will recover (the US TFR was below 2.0 in the 70s and 80s and recovered after that). At the same time, there are probably some common factors (across many nations) that are putting pressure on these stats (at least relative to the past).

If interested, people can look at what's happened in Japan over the last couple of decades (working age population declined followed by a total population decline). I think it is probably best to look at stats in JPY terms.

Just to add to the above, the assumed TFR in the report mentioned was 1.2. Since, TFR has pretty much been steadily declining towards 1.0 (i.e. assumption > reality, probably common among many prior reports/projections).

For reference, much of the world faces this challenge, albeit some countries are in better shape than others, relatively speaking. Here are some of the OCED projections for 2027 and 2050.

USA: 2.9 / 2.5
Australia: 3.0 / 2.4
Canada: 2.6 / 2.2
UK: 2.7 / 2.1
France: 2.4 / 1.8
Germany: 2.1 / 1.7
Italy: 2.2 / 1.3
Korea 2.9 / 1.3
Japan: 1.8 / 1.2

Just to clarify, the country ratios above are Old Age Support (Working Age Population / Elderly or 20-64 yrs / 65+ yr). The Old Age Dependency Ratio is the inverse of this and expressed as a decimal or percentage.

[NYY1]

@NYY1
what do u do ? ur posts are often very analytical and data driven and logical.

I've always had an interest in economics, philosophy, and politics. Additionally, when looking at any business, there are often a few key factors/drivers that one cannot escape from. If these go to the moon or down the drain, you pretty much know what your outcome is going to be.

As it relates to demographics, a lot of this stuff has been known for years (globally). There are minor changes based on policy tweaks and how the actual numbers ebb and flow. But more or less it's a slow-moving ship and the writing is on the wall.

Still, our intuition and logic aren't always correct. It's good to back test things or find similar situations and see if the outcomes are or were consistent with what you'd expect.

[Strong Eagle]

Still, our intuition and logic aren't always correct. It's good to back test things or find similar situations and see if the outcomes are or were consistent with what you'd expect.

Indeed. Before I did some research on dropping fertility rates in developed countries, I was operating under the assumption (incorrect) that dropping birth rates were the result of global uncertainty... climate change, economic chaos, war... that is, parents wouldn't have children because they don't know what kind of world their children will face.

But, it turns out that people behave just like so many other species of animals do... when times are good, the number of offspring produced goes down, and when times are bad, the number of offspring produced goes up. This is both a function of having enough offspring who will "make it", and having enough resources to support ourselves in old age.

Developed countries have the ecosystem that satisfies both of these conditions. Parents have sufficient resources and offspring have a world where they can thrive and succeed. So fewer children are produced.

Here's the population pyramids of China and Japan.

[jalanjalan]

Developed countries have the ecosystem that satisfies both of these conditions. Parents have sufficient resources and offspring have a world where they can thrive and succeed. So fewer children are produced.

Seems to be. Marriage is considered optional now.

7 in 10 young Singaporeans feel it is not necessary to marry, but most still want to: Poll
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ ... nt-to-poll

In South Korea, more young people say marriage ‘not necessary’ as nation’s birth rates plummet
https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asi ... es-plummet

[Wd40]

Developed countries have the ecosystem that satisfies both of these conditions. Parents have sufficient resources and offspring have a world where they can thrive and succeed. So fewer children are produced.

Seems to be. Marriage is considered optional now.

7 in 10 young Singaporeans feel it is not necessary to marry, but most still want to: Poll
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ ... nt-to-poll

In South Korea, more young people say marriage ‘not necessary’ as nation’s birth rates plummet
https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asi ... es-plummet

The world is going to be more brown and less yellow 30 years from now.

[Max Headroom]

I believe the word is "beige" : )