No evidence ageing/declining populations compromise socio-economic performance

Paper’s Claims and Methodology

• Some applaud the basic scientific move: questioning an “obviously true” belief (aging/decline = economic doom) and checking data.
• Many find the paper shallow: cross‑country correlations with huge confounders, treating rich, low‑fertility countries’ current performance as proof that low fertility has no long‑term cost.
• Critics say the dependency ratio metric and 65+ cutoff ignore the youth cohort and the time lag: low fertility today bites decades later.
• The paper is accused of confusing correlation with causation: it mostly shows “rich → low fertility”, not “low fertility → prosperity”.
• The “Middle East exception” is cited as undermining any simple causal story from aging to wealth.

Immigration and Labor Shortages

• The key sentence that labor shortages are due to “inadequate immigration policies” is widely attacked as unsubstantiated; immigration isn’t modeled in the analysis.
• To some, this is a tacit admission that aging can cause shortages; proposing immigration as the fix doesn’t mean there’s no problem.
• Others argue that with global fertility falling, you cannot “immigrate your way out” indefinitely; eventually there are no surplus young workers.
• There’s disagreement on whether large‑scale immigration is a net good: some see mutual gains for migrants and host countries; others emphasize exploitation, brain drain, and harm to low‑income natives.

Global Fertility, Time Lags, and Demographic Mechanics

• Commenters stress it takes ~20+ years for a child to become a net economic contributor; looking only at current cross‑sections misses coming shocks.
• Examples like Japan vs South Korea and the “demographic dividend” illustrate that aging problems appear long after fertility falls.
• Simple thought experiments (population shrinking to 1, Seoul losing two‑thirds of its residents) are used to argue there must be breaking points where specialization and infrastructure become unsustainable.

Economic Structure, Inequality, and Growth

• Several see current immigration‑based solutions as part of a broader “growth‑at‑all‑costs” or “pyramid scheme” capitalism, prioritizing shareholder value over stability.
• Debate emerges over who really “contributes” economically given capital‑driven wealth accumulation and heavy redistribution from top income percentiles.
• Some suggest that better social safety nets or UBI would likely raise birth rates; others argue lifestyle preferences now trump financial constraints.

Normative and Cultural Questions

• Some ask whether declining aggregate GDP is actually bad if per‑capita well‑being rises; maybe a smaller, stable population is desirable.
• Others worry about intergenerational injustice (older cohorts consuming assets) and about cultural/identity changes from large‑scale immigration (“country of Theseus” concerns).