A Japanese nationalist party led by fiery anti-globalist Sohei Kamiya was among the biggest winners in this summer’s parliamentary election

Outside a train station near Tokyo, hundreds of people cheer as Sohei Kamiya, head of the surging nationalist party Sanseito, criticizes Japan’s rapidly growing foreign population.

As opponents, separated by uniformed police and bodyguards, accuse him of racism, Kamiya shouts back, saying he is only talking common sense.

Sanseito, while still a minor party, made big gains in July’s parliamentary election, and Kamiya’s “Japanese First” platform of anti-globalism, anti-immigration and anti-liberalism is gaining broader traction ahead of a ruling party vote Saturday that will choose the likely next prime minister.

  • Lumisal@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    2 days ago

    If you want that type of detailed analysis report then, I give you two options:

    1. Pay me, because that shit takes a lot of time.
    2. Actually look up that exact information yourself from existing reports and back up your own initial claims with exact numbers. Inexact questions will result in estimated answers. If you actually want to know the truth, try to prove yourself wrong instead of asking something in a random thread and not even looking into all the answers you get, instead repeating your own assertions.

    As for your other hyperbolia:

    For example, let’s say everyone’s electricity bill is 50$… Out of your wage of what 1500$? 2000$? So if population declines by 10% and the electricity bill goes up by 10% or 5$ you’re telling that it will collapse the nation?

    The issue isn’t that places on Japan are facing a 10% population decline. It’s that they’re facing a 50+% generational decline. That distinction is important because if it was only the elderly population that dropped, there actually wouldn’t be as much financial stress or labor issues to support systems as currently, where the elderly population grows massive while the younger one shrinks drastically.

    It isn’t a 500¥ increase that’s the issue, it’s the rise of everything that’ll be the issue, especially since the elderly will be the overwhelming majority.

    And while all of that happens: keep in mind that real estate value and prices will go down. Less people means less need for living space. It means it will be cheaper to move to cities, with higher concentrations of people in areas that already have infrastructure, that’s already mostly paid for.

    That’s not how modern real estate works. Cities would become more expensive to move into - because it’ll have the higher infrastructure costs, it’ll be mostly filled with the elderly, but most importantly, because many apartments will be shutdown due to growing vacancies making it unprofitable. If modern cities were mostly houses, then everything would actually be great. But because they’re mostly apartments, it becomes an issue. If anything, it’ll be cheaper to move out of the cities, because public transportation will be underfunded anyway, and infrastructure costs in rural areas will become lower because rural areas are designed for smaller populations and less people, unlike cities. Cities will just keep getting more expensive to maintain - that’s an effect you can already see in multiple countries.

    • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      2 days ago

      no, though I understand that it’s effort.

      Also no, because the whole thing is YOUR CLAIM, and I’m not going to go around looking for evidence to disprove random theories on the internet.

      And the rest of your comment again relies on statements that may or may not be true and both of us don’t have the data that could be used to decide either way.

      sidenote:

      instead repeating your own assertions.

      That’s what you are doing. I’m just calling you out on it.