The Russian Depopulation

Photo of Russian dolls moving down in smaller size

Today we’ll be discussing Russian birth and death rates since we’ve got some new Russian demographic data to look at. So, go ahead and grab that truckload of salt.

Russian birth and death rates have fluctuated quite a bit due to major events. The most notable was the demographic “death cross” in the 1990s where deaths outnumbered births; this sent the Russians down a dark path of population decline. Despite some brief recoveries throughout the past few decades, new data out of Russia has confirmed things have worsened.

That recent Russian data is likely overly optimistic, so things are bad. Combine that bleak demographic outlook with no improvements to infrastructure, education, or public health, and you can do the math. Of course, the Ukraine War has accelerated this crisis, as the Russians have sent wave after wave into the meat grinder. That current strategy is unsustainable, but a victory in Ukraine could at least put a little bit of air into the Russians’ lungs. A loss or stagnation would suck even more air out.

Either way, Russia is quickly hacking away at its final opportunity at demographic recovery, which brings long-term viability as a functional state into question.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan on Geopolitics, our chosen charity partner is MedShare. They provide emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it, so we can be sure that every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence.

For those who would like to donate directly to MedShare or to learn more about their efforts, you can click this link.

Learn about medshare here

Transcript

Hey, everybody. Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Bell Block, New Zealand. Today we are going to discuss the newest data that’s out from the Russians on their demographics. Russia stopped collecting, demographic data about 17, 18 years ago and have really just been making it up ever since. Now, if you look back through Russian history, there have been a lot of, dark chapters. 

And as a rule, when people are depressed, they don’t feel it’s a good idea to have a lot of kids. So these giant rises and dips in the Russian birth rate and death rate, based on what’s going on culturally and economically with the country. Now, the biggest ones, of course, are World War one, World War two. There was a time when Khrushchev tried to shove everyone into small apartments because he thought that was modern, less room for kids. And then, of course, the biggest one is the post-Soviet collapse, when the bottom two, a lot of the Soviet system and we had extended period about 20 years, where basically nothing got better. 

You combine this with rampant heroin use and, alcoholism. That is just atrocious by most modern country. Measures, and you get something called a Death cross that happened in the 1990s. And that’s a point when the birth rate and the death rate crossed so that the death rate is higher. And even before you consider incremental mortality issues, you have population shrinkage. Now, a couple of things to keep in mind. 

Number one, the Russians back in the mid 80s had this moment of opening and perestroika where we thought maybe, just maybe, we can save the Soviet system. And there absolutely was a little baby boom. And if you fast forward 25, 30 years to just a few years ago, the children of that baby boom, also had kids at a time when Russia was riding high on high energy prices under Vladimir Putin, in the late 2000. 

I’m sorry, 20 tens. And so we got another little mini beanie boom. And so that death cross re crossed into a life cross very, very briefly for a very, very low cross. But it was successful and at least for a couple of years bringing the birthrate back up about the death rate. Well with the new data it is clear that that has now reversed. 

And remember, this is new data provided by the Russian government is undoubtedly overly optimistic. But even by their own data, they’re now back in the negative territory. All right. So this takes us two places. Number one, none of the underlying issues that have plagued Russia for the last century have gone away. All of them are more intense. 

The infrastructure of the Soviet period is still degrading. The Russians have still been unable to rebuild their educational system. Alcoholism is still arise. Drug use is still rife. I’ve run out of speech. Going to go the other way now. And so you shouldn’t expect any improvement because it’s going to be another 25, 30 years before now, the grandchildren of perestroika could be born. 

And so you’re dealing more now with the aftereffects of World War one and World War two and oppression and the post-Soviet collapse. And it’s more likely that this period of death is going to be far more intense than what we’ve seen before, because all of the younger people are now older. You know, the boom that they had, say, in the 70s, and they’re just unable to have children now. 

The next generation that will be able to have children will be doing it for another 20 years. And second, and far more intensely, is the Ukraine war. As you will notice from this most recent death across it began before the Ukraine war, before Ukraine, or before it began, before the Ukraine war, before Russia became a pariah again, before Russia was under the most extreme sanctions that any major country has ever been on before. 

The Russians started seeing massive battlefield casualties. So we are again, in one of those moments in Russian history where people are unsure of their future and they’re not having kids. In addition to the fact that the demographic moment has already passed from the perestroika boom echo, we are already seeing on a daily basis for the last year and a half that more Russian men are dying on the fields of battle in Ukraine than, Russian boys are being born. 

And we’ve even had a few days where more men have been dying in the fields of Ukraine than the total number of births – boys and girls. 

So We are seeing the Russians waste their last chance to have positive demographic growth ever. And there’s no reason to expect that there’s anything in the Russian system that’s going to improve the, the birthrate or decrease the death rate anytime soon. One of the reasons why Russia has been a major power for so long is numbers. 

They have a lot of hope, you know. We’ve had a large country with a lot of ethnic groups and disposing of surplus ethnic groups in the middle of war has long been a Russian strategy for managing their population. They’re doing that now. But you can only do that so long. And that always assumes that you have a robust birthrate, which the Russians don’t anymore. 

So the Russians have never been really able to upgrade and update their military strategies in the post-Cold War era to reflect the changes in the demographic picture that just no longer exist and really haven’t existed for decades. So it’s all about lots and lots of artillery. It’s all about what they call meat assaults. It’s human wave tactics, and that works as long as you massively outnumber your foe. 

And there are roughly four Russians for every Ukrainian. So it’s not a strategy that is stupid, but is a strategy that if you keep using it when you don’t have a bottomless supply of fighters, that you really eat into what allows your country to exist in the first place. Now, even with this going on, the Russians have more time on their demographic clock than a country like, say, China that has had a rock bottom birth rate now for 40 years. 

But when you start burning more people in their 20s than you’re generating babies. You are definitely on a starvation diet. And the question in my mind has always been, when this century, does the Russian ethnicity lose sufficient coherence that it can’t even maintain a state? If they win the Ukraine war, they establish a better external buffer system. 

I would say that that would probably be the 2070s or 2080s. But if they become stalled in Ukraine, if they get forced into a piece or a battlefield defeat, that means that they have expended all of the costs of fighting a major war without getting many of the benefits. Then you’re looking at this happening 20, 30, maybe even 40 years earlier. 

So, believe it or not, we’re in this weird situation where as long as the Russians are doing this terrific meat assault, it’s really good for the rest of the world. Unless, of course, you happen to be the country that’s on the receiving end. That would be Ukraine. Because it brings forward the day where the Russians just can’t fight any longer at all.

The Real Secret to Saving Birthrates

Photo of babies

Today’s conversation might piss off a few prophylactic companies (no, I’m not suggesting we buy thumb tacks and go crazy). The question of the day is…how can we get people to procreate?

No, the lingerie and aphrodisiacs aren’t going to save us this time, we’re talking about bigger changes. A good starting point is making having kids easier: lower costs for essentials like housing, electricity, and food. But then you still need those parents to remain part of the workforce. So, the sticking point is childcare.

Affordable childcare might just be the most effective policy to sustain birthrates and keep your workforce intact in the process. Certain industries in the US (like healthcare) and countries (like Scandinavia) have somewhat figured this out, although it can be pricey.

Once you get the childcare piece taken care of, then you need space for these children to play and grow. Take New Zealand for example, they’ve found a way to keep children (and tipsy adults if we’re being honest) busy for hours and hours…

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan on Geopolitics, our chosen charity partner is MedShare. They provide emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it, so we can be sure that every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence.

For those who would like to donate directly to MedShare or to learn more about their efforts, you can click this link.

Learn about medshare here

Transcript

Hey everybody. Peter Zeihan here, coming to you from Tongariro National Park in New Zealand while I’m doing the Tongariro Northern Circuit, that is mountain Guro in the background, which is and we basically we’ve been going around it the whole time. So why it’s called Tongariro Circuit, not in the whole circuit, I don’t know. Anyway, you might recognize that mountain from Lord of the rings that is Mountain Doom. 

So I prefer to call this track the Doom Loop. Anyway, today, taking a question from the Patreon crowd. And that’s specifically if demographics are so core to the success and failure of countries, what are some policies that could be adopted to encourage demographic expansion? Just great question. Quick review. People between 20 and 45 are the ones who are raising kids and spending money and building homes. 

That’s where most consumption comes from. People between roughly 45 and 65, the kids have moved out. The house has been paid for, but they’re earning a lot. So the consumption is down, but their income is high. And so they are investing. And that’s where the capital in the tax base comes from, having a balance between those two. Without too many retirees, but enough children to generate the next generation. 

That’s ultimately what you want anyway. In most of the world, that’s not what we have. Birth rates have been declining for so long that most of the advanced world, including China, in that are not just running out of children. That happened 20, 30, 40 years ago. They’re now running out of working age adults. So for many of these countries, it’s too late, but not for everybody. 

For New Zealand, France and the United States and the Scandinavian countries, the demographic structures are much younger, and so there’s plenty of chance to rehabilitate. Really, it comes down to one thing. Whether you make it easy to have kids, financially speaking, so low cost of electricity, low cost of land, low cost of food, those are all real impetuses. 

And finding ways to manipulate those things is absolutely important. But the biggest thing is making sure that would be parents are able to still make choices. And for that, you need to keep both parents in the work force should they so choose. And so it isn’t so much subsidization or paying people to have kids that rarely works. 

Instead, it is making sure that there are abilities, the parents can still work and have kids. And that really comes down to childcare. If you can provide affordable, easily accessible childcare, that’s the single biggest thing you can do to keep the birth rates high, because parents, whether men or women are going to not feel like that, they have to make sacrifices in order to have a family, in the United States. 

I would argue that the only place that we get this right is with health care personnel. Because if you’re on call and you have to run into the hospital or the clinic, then your kid has to go somewhere. And so there’s a really robust system in the United States for that, for that specific subsector. But for everyone else, you’re kind of on your own. 

If you don’t have a grandparent or an aunt or uncle nearby. The Scandinavians have done this a different way where they just have state subsidized health care for everybody. But that gets really expensive really quickly. Hopefully we can figure out something in between in the United States, before the birthrate drops to low. 

Okay. We’re going to finish this one up for menopause. Now, as any parent will tell you, there’s one other thing that you have to have if you’re going to be raising kids in that space and the transition from agrarian to industrialized lifestyles, we all started moving into towns and the ability to banish kids to the outside went down. 

So even more than needing childcare, you need the ability to put your kids somewhere. Well, in New Zealand, they’ve got that in spades. Not only is there a lot of green space in the country, but they have gone out and built in every major population center, including all the minor ones. Something really special.

Boomers, Xers, and Budgeting

Photo of old commodore computer and retro items

Today, we’re talking about America’s Gen X, aka the best generation, and our role in the US economy moving forward. Let’s look at the current situation and what to expect in the coming decade or so.

It all starts with the Boomers biting off more than they could chew. They built a welfare state but couldn’t fund it and are leaving massive deficits as they retire into their beachfront mansions. Now, me and my fellow Xers, despite being the second smallest generation, are going to have fix all those problems.

As the Boomers retire, Gen X will come into its economic peak, meaning it controls the wealth, property, and investments. This means a nice period of record wage growth for Gen X, but that won’t last forever. Eventually, the Millennials and remaining Boomers will burden Gen X and force them to make larger contributions to bail out the economy.

So, all my Xers should be “getting that bread” while they can because Uncle Sam is going to come knocking at your door soon enough.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan on Geopolitics, our chosen charity partner is MedShare. They provide emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it, so we can be sure that every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence.

For those who would like to donate directly to MedShare or to learn more about their efforts, you can click this link.

Learn about medshare here

Transcript

Hey, everybody. Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from just outside of longs Bay in New Zealand. Coromandel region, taking a question from the Patreon crowd today, which is one near and dear to me because it talks about two issues that I care about a lot demographics and me. And the question is, what is the future of America’s Gen X? 

Are we simply doomed to pick up the trash after the boomers kegger party? Yes and no. So, the back story, demographically speaking, you can cluster people into different financial groups by age. So folks under age 18 are typically dependents. People age 18 to 45 are the big consumers. They’re spending a lot of money raising kids and buying homes, but their incomes are low. 

So high outflow, high consumption, high growth, high inflation, but low capital generation, low tax base. Then once you turn 45 and until you retire at 65, you are saving for retirement. Your income is at it’s the highest it will be in your life. The kids have largely moved out. The house has been paid down. You’re starting to think about downsizing different economic model. 

in this sort of system. The tax base is huge. There’s a lot of capital running through the system. Capital cost, borrowing costs are low. The government gets lots and lots of income that it uses to expand the state technical training, infrastructure, that sort of thing. But consumption has dropped off. And then you turn 65 and you retire and you liquidate most of your financial assets and go into low risk stuff. 

No stocks, no bonds. Typically T-bills, cash and real estate. That money is no longer available for the tax base. It is no longer available for investment capital. And then you whittle away on that as you retire. So the baby boomers have been the largest generation ever in American history for two reasons. Number one, when the GIS came home, they basically founded modern America. 

They had large families and they moved to establish new territories that we now know was the suburbs. In addition, they were the first generation born during a period when the country had already been industrialized. And what happens when a country industrialize is it’s not just that you get rail lines and electricity, you also get antibiotics and hospitals. So the highest death rate for any age group preindustrial is 0 to 5 years old. 

Newborns and young children who, tend to die off. And so people always have replacement children. If that sounds familiar. Anyway, doesn’t really happen for the boomers for the first time. And you combine health care with a new generation that’s large, they live longer. And so we got a double population bulge with the baby boomers. And it was so huge relative and remains so huge relative to all other population groups that they have basically dominated American economic and cultural life ever since. 

So when they were going through their, early adulthood years in the late 60s to the early 80s, labor costs were low because we they supersaturated the labor market. Inflation was high because of their demand. And all of the American pressures were demand based. Then from the late 80s until roughly 2015, when they had their kids had moved out, and they were generating all that capital inflation dropped quite a bit. 

Growth slowed, too. But all of that investment capital that they were generating pushed things forward, like, say, the tech revolution. That also allowed for the expansion of the government under Johnson and Nixon and Reagan. And during this time, the boomers, because the cash flows were robust, built a larger and a larger welfare state, primarily looking at themselves. 

You fast forward today. Now two thirds of them are retired. They’re taking their money. They’re going home. The taxes that they’re paying have dropped off. And we are left with a welfare state to fund their retirement without their income to pay for it all. And the next generation down, the one now entering the capital rich part of their lives is generation X, which is the second smallest generation the United States has ever had. 

So simply on the numbers between the exiting boomers and the entering Xers, we’re looking at chronic budget deficits. Assuming the government was relatively circumspect in its spending. But our last few boomer governments Trump, Biden, Obama, w Bush have been the most fiscally proliferate in American history. And so we’re looking at absolutely massive multitrillion dollar deficits every single year. 

To be continued. 

Okay. Continuing from Buffalo Beach and city on go. So anyway, deficits, massive locked in as long as the boomers live, which is going to be on average, you know, another 15 to 25 years based on who’s doing the math. And during that whole time, the boomers have created a social welfare state for themselves. So they have had never had any intention of paying for. 

And since the next generation down, that is now and coming capital riches, Gen X and the boomers have always outnumber Gen Z by substantial margin. So you financial burden will fall on them. In this, the boomers can count on getting voting backstop against any sort of fiscal reform from their children. Who are the millennials who are maybe the second most selfish generation in American history? 

So you can count on these two voting blocs agreeing that extra should pay for everything. So assume me if at some point there is any effort in Congress to actually rationalize the budget, you’re going to have these two voting blocs, the two largest voting blocs in American history, forcing that rationalization on the group that is most capital rich Gen-X. 

Now, that’s the bad side. That’s the cleaning up the solo cups argument. But there is a positive side here. For some people, specifically with the boomers leaving, we have a lot of tension and tightness in our labor market. They were the largest generation ever. Which means they were the largest work cadre ever. And because there were so many of them in the 60s, 70s and 80s, they pushed down the cost of labor, which made the labor market hyper competitive. 

From a global point of view, and we had inflation due to their consumption from any number of points of view, but from their earning potential was actually fairly low. So most of the hand-wringing during that era about wage increases being too low for the inflation rate was totally rooted in the size of the boomers. 

And that disconnect, in order to make ends meet, that made the boomers the most mobile generation we’ve ever had in history since the time of the pioneers, because it was all about going to wherever they could get a little bit more income. And it also pushed, women into the workforce in order to get a second income. 

Now, you play that forward for a couple of decades and you change the labor market. You change social norms, you get the sexual revolution, you get the women’s rights movements. All of these things were because there were so many boomers. But now that all of that labor is leaving the market. We have something that from a global point of view, is a lot more typical, and we’re just not used to it. 

And so we have labor inflation eating into the system. Now. Now something to remember about the boomers when you have a two income household because you have to for financial reasons, the pressure on the family unit and the pressure on married couples is really robust. And so the boomers also had the highest divorce rate ever in American history. 

Now Gen X coming up behind them looks at this. It’s like, no, we’re not doing things that way. The boomers have always said that they value their money more than their time. We see the pain of that and we are not going to make that mistake. We are far more likely to value our time over our money. So unlike the boomers, who have lots and lots and lots of two income households, and high labor rates as a result actually went the other direction and have a relatively low labor participation rate with a lot more single income households. 

That puts you under a lot of financial pressure, because not only is there half as many people working and earning, it also means that you’re less likely to move and you’re also at the bottom of the totem pole with all these boomers above you. So you Xers were working in a super saturated labor market that they couldn’t really affect because they were down at the bottom, and they were less likely to work in order to preserve their families. 

Gave us a much lower divorce rate, much more stable relationship rate than anything that the boomers had. But wow, did we pay for it.  

We saw the lowest increases in take home pay on an annual basis of any worker generation in American history, until about five years ago, when one third of the boomers had already retired. And now in the last five years, we’ve seen the greatest increases in take home pay of any American generation ever. Because all of the skilled, all of the upper level management jobs are becoming available at the same time. 

And even if everyone in Gen X wanted to work, and I guarantee you we do not, there would have never been enough of us to fill all of those boomers shows shoes anyway. And so from the extra point of view, we’re seeing record increases in take home pay for the first time in our adult lives. Now, the rest of the world knows that as labor inflation. 

But honestly, the rest of you can suck it because we’re finally having our moment at some point in the next 10 to 15 years, when the axes are at the peak of their income and the peak of their wealth. Because of this delayed gratification, there is going to be a conversation in the United States led by these six millennials who can do math about rationalize the budget. 

So Larry, Moe, curly, Thelma Louise, and Lafond are going to sit down and run the math and realize that the only way they can make the budget make sense is to basically gut Gen X, and they’ll have the voting power to do it. Now, until we get to that point. It’s a X world. We’re going to control all of the money. 

We’re going to throw the majority of the property, we’re going to dominate the stock market. And we’re in a situation of supply and demand. If capital is available, unlimited supply if demand is robust at a time when the millennials are having their kids and building their homes, large generation demand and we need to re industrialize the United States, doubling the size of the industrial plant. 

Whoever has the capital, Gen X is going to be able to demand exorbitant rates for it, and it’s going to be a great time until such time as the millennials actually run the numbers. So if you’re an Xer, our time has finally arrived. But it’s only going to be a moment. So make the most of it. Get your money where it’s going to be protected, because sooner or later the millennials will figure this out and we will find a way to get the budget back into some degree of balance. 

 And it will be Gen X. It’s paying for it, but not today.

The Garbage Time of History: China’s Economic Decline

*This video was recorded before Peter’s backpacking trip in mid-July.

Lesson of the day: if the Chinese government starts censoring a topic, it’s probably time to start looking into that. Today, we’ll be examining China’s economy heading into ‘garbage time’.

For the non-athletes that follow me, garbage time is a sports term that refers to the final minutes of a play when there is no chance for the losing team to recover, yet play must continue. So, if we apply that to the Chinese economy, it would suggest that China has crossed the point of no return.

If you trust the data coming out of China, the economy is stagnant and the demographic picture is grim. If you take your Chinese data with a grain of salt, the economy and demography of China are in a unrecoverable nose dive. So, to say that China is ‘laying flat’ and in ‘garbage time’ is no exaggeration.

If there was anything that might help China hold on, it would be strong international trade. Unfortunately, many countries are stepping away from deals with China and removing that last sliver of hope for the Chinese.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

Transcript

Hey everybody. Peter Zeihan here, coming to you from Lost Valley in Colorado, just above Denver. Today we’re going to talk about a bit of Chinese censorship and the general downward spiral the Chinese find themselves in. I keep an eye on what the Chinese are banning because it gives you an idea of what Xi Jinping and the CCP in China are nervous about.

A couple of new terms have popped up on the ban list that I think are worth discussing because they put a few things into context. The first term is “garbage time.” For those of you who are sports enthusiasts, you might have heard of this term. It refers to the final minutes of a game when one team is so far ahead that it’s impossible for the underdog to catch up. They still have to play out the rest of the game before officially losing. In geopolitical terms, it’s a concept that emerged in the 2000s and 1990s, referring to the period after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 when it became clear that the system was broken and it was just a matter of time before the inevitable end.

The Chinese government doesn’t like this term because it implies that their system is fundamentally broken and that it’s just a waiting game until the end.

The second term is “laying flat.” This idea is that things are so broken and hard work will get you nowhere in a dysfunctional system, so you might as well do the least amount of work possible because there’s no reward for anything else. Again, this term is problematic for the Chinese government because it reflects widespread disillusionment.

These terms are indicative of the economic situation in China. The Chinese recently released new data, showing annual growth once again coming in under 5%. This has been the trend since 2019. Most experts believe that China’s government overestimated their GDP growth by about five percentage points since the 2010s, suggesting that for the past five to six years, China really hasn’t grown much at all. This is reminiscent of Japanese-style stagnation but with an economy that hasn’t advanced as far.

Recent demographic data from China indicates that they’ve lost another 8 million people under age five. The data now publicly admits that there are roughly the same number of people aged 50 to 70 as there are aged 0 to 25. This is significant because, ideally, the younger age group should be two to three times as large as the older group.

Independent demographers argue that China has overstated its population by 100 to 250 million people, particularly under age 40. This suggests that the 0 to 25 age group may be overstated by at least 80 million people, possibly closer to 150 or even 200 million. Most consumption in an economy is driven by people under age 40, who are the ones buying homes and raising children. If this next generation doesn’t exist in significant numbers, China can never achieve consumption-led growth again.

This makes China increasingly dependent on international trade, which is in the process of cutting China out of the global system. This started with Donald Trump in the United States and has now expanded with recent sanctions on things like electric vehicles to Europe, Turkey, India, Indonesia, and Brazil. The effort is going global. So, the last best hope the Chinese had for recovery is now over six years old, and it looks like there won’t be another one. People are beginning to notice.

Can AI Replace Those Retiring Boomers?

*This video was recorded in mid-July, prior to Peter departing on his backpacking trip.

As the baby boomers age into retirement and Gen Z fails to satisfy the gaping hole left in the labor market, will artificial intelligence be able to help mitigate some of the fallout?

AI has solidified its spot in the labor mix of the future, but “when?” and “how?” are the looming questions. Producing AI-capable chips remains highly complex and reliant upon a web of critical international suppliers. Until that supply chain is slimmed down and fail-safes are added, production disruptions will continue to be a huge factor in limiting the AI buildout.

On the other front, the nature of AI lends itself to better take on white-collar work. Most people picture AI taking care of the manual and mundane tasks no one wants, but it is better suited to a lifestyle “in the office”. So, the places we need the help most, like blue-collar jobs, won’t get much help on the AI front.

AI’s transformative effect is coming, but it won’t occur as quickly as many expect. Think in the 40s rather than the 20s. When it does arrive, the productivity in white-collar jobs will skyrocket, but fields that really need some extra hands (or hand effectors or whatever you call robots’ metaphorical gripping mechanisms) will still be scrambling to navigate the labor shortages.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

Transcript

Hey, everybody. Peter Zeihan here, coming to you from the Lake of the Ozarks in Missouri. Today, I’m taking a question from the Ask Peter forum about artificial intelligence. The question is, with labor shortages looming due to the retirement of the baby boomers, the largest workforce we’ve ever had, and the new generation, Generation Z (the Zoomers), being the smallest generation ever, can increases in productivity, such as through artificial intelligence, help round out and fix these issues? The answer is… maybe.

There are a couple of problems here. First, it’s very unlikely that we can sustain the level of production of artificial intelligence-capable chips necessary to fundamentally transform the American or global workforce. The issue is that thousands of companies are involved in manufacturing these chips. Yes, 90% of these chips come from a single town in Taiwan, which poses a security risk, but the problem is even bigger. Most companies in the supply chain for these fabrication facilities only make one product for one end user, which is TSMC in Taiwan. If something happens to a few of these companies, we could lose the ability to make these chips at all. So the idea of having massive server farms crunching data for artificial intelligence is probably not going to happen this decade and might not happen next decade. We’ll need to build a new ecosystem for that, and it takes time.

The second problem is the nature of artificial intelligence itself. There’s a saying that’s becoming popular: “We want artificial intelligence to do the dishes so that we can spend more time writing, not to do our writing so that all that’s left is the dishes.” The issue here is that artificial intelligence primarily helps with white-collar work, like brain work, correlation tasks, paralegals, researchers, writers, and editors. These are the sorts of jobs that AI is most likely to slim down. But that’s not where the labor shortage is in the United States. Over the last 50 years, baby boomers have focused on getting their kids into college and into high-value-added white-collar jobs.

However, in a world where China is fading quickly and the United States is experiencing an industrial renaissance, we need electricians, welders, linemen—people to physically move and make things. These are blue-collar jobs, not white-collar, and artificial intelligence can’t help nearly as much with them.

So while artificial intelligence will be a part of the future, I don’t think it’s going to happen as quickly as some expect. When it does, it’s going to reshape industries like finance, making it more efficient to move money around, which could reduce the need for large numbers of coders in places like New York. It’s going to increase the productivity of white-collar workers, so we might not need as many people handling tasks like processing insurance claims in doctors’ offices. AI might also help crack the genome to boost agricultural productivity and will certainly play a role in defense and cryptography to enhance security.

But it’s unlikely to have a huge impact on manufacturing. For that to happen, we don’t just need AI; we need robotics—mobile robotics—and AI isn’t quite there yet. It’s progressing, but we’re looking at the 2040s, not the 2020s, for significant developments in that area. So can AI help? Sure, at the margins. But you’re probably still going to have to do your own dishes.

Why Genoa Is Graying: Italy’s Demographic Decline

While the Italians may have mastered the arts of pasta, wine and gelato, they should have been spending less time in the kitchen and more in…another room. That’s right, we’re looking at the demographic problems facing Italy, and Genoa will be our example.

The population of Genoa in 1972 was 950,000. Today, it is under 680,000. The scary part is that Genoa isn’t an isolated instance. Italy’s birth rate has been below replacement level for over 75 years, leading to an aging population and a shrinking tax base. The scarier part is that Italy is just one example of a country facing demographic collapse, as places like Germany, Romania, and Spain are all in the same boat.

Unfortunately, there’s really no practical solutions for these countries to remedy this issue. Sustaining their economies and state functions without a younger generation won’t be easy, but at least we’ll see how nations can adapt to these demographic challenges.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

Transcript

Hey everybody. Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Genoa, Italy. And I’m going to do something a little bit different today. I am going to show you the world through my eyes. Let’s turn this around. We’re over the business district in the central Genoa, and it’s not the buildings in the foreground I want you to see. It’s the ones in the background. 

The ones that are in more residential. You’ll notice that not a lot of them have a lot of lights on it. And over here we’re starting to go a the old town similar situation. And as we move over here you can see the train station kind of Grand Central if you will, and then up on the hill is mostly residential spots. 

But you’ll notice that even though it’s 10:00 at night, which is, you know, when everyone’s getting home from dinner in Italy, most of the buildings are less than one third lit up. Some of them, well, less than a quarter. the issue is that for the entirety of my life, Genoa one has been shrinking in population terms. 

And I turned 50 this year. 1972 was the last year that the city saw it increase in population. And that is pretty typical for Italian cities writ large. Unfortunately, Italy is going through a population crash and it’s well past the point of no return. the birth rate has been below two, births per woman for in excess of three quarters of a century. 

And over the next five years, the population bulge that exists in many countries exists here, too, but they move into mass retirement now, I’ve been traveling through Italy for about ten days now, and I’ve begun to a lot of small towns and, you know, they’re they’re full of old people and not a lot of them. and everyone has the same refrains, like all the young people were picked up to move to the cities. 

But now that I’m in one of the major cities, I can see that’s not the case. It’s just people haven’t been born here for a very long time, and now we’re looking at the dissolution of the tax base that is necessary to maintain a modern, civilized location. the the smart play here would be to turn back time and go back to the 1970s and figure out a way to make it easier for young people to have children. 

but at this point, the only theoretical solution would be to bring in Canadian style levels of immigration and a sudden wave that never ends. simply in order to stabilize the Italian population in its current structure, which is already the oldest demographic and the fastest aging demographic in Europe, would be to bring in somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million people under age 35 every year from now on, which, of course, would end Italy in its current form. 

Some version of this problem exists in huge portions of the world. Europe, of course, is where I’m thinking right now, because this is where I am. The Germans are only a few years, no more than five behind the Italians. And then there are a number of other countries that are a little bit younger but are actually aging faster. 

Whether it’s Romania or Spain. Poland still has a chance for demographic reconstitution, but only if they get on it right now. the Russians are in a position. The Ukrainians are in a worse position. And, East Asia, Taiwan is kind of where Poland is right now, whereas Japan and Italy are very, very similar. and the Koreans are about where the Germans are. 

So we’re seeing this over and over and over throughout the world. accelerated urbanization over the last 50 to 75 years has generated a population structure that is so old and aging so quickly, the reconstitution is no longer possible. And a number of the advanced states Italy, Germany, Korea, Japan, the next decade is going to provide a new model for us, populations in countries that are no longer capable of mass consumption or mass investment or max tax generation. 

At the same time their populations move into mass retirement. something’s going to have to give, whether it will be state coherence or the finances or the economic model. First, everyone’s got to figure that out for themselves. 

US Birth Rates Plummet To 40-Year Low

The Webinar – The State of Global Energy – is TOMORROW!

Peter will deliver his analysis and forecasts for regional energy production and his assessment of geopolitical risk—everything from war, to instability and regulatory risk—with an eye on challenges and opportunities facing global production and supply.

Please join us on Friday, May 10th at 12:00 PM EST.

CLICK HERE TO REGISTER FOR THE WEBINAR

Well, it looks like there’s something in the water in the US and it ain’t little blue pills. The recent US Census data shows a 40-year low in the birth rate – about 1.6 per woman.

With the birth rate well below the replacement level, there could be huge economic implications that follow. There are plenty of other countries facing similar demographic issues, so the US has plenty of case studies to read up on.

This isn’t the kiss of death quite yet, but it won’t be easy path forward. Between meaningful immigration reform and policies supporting young families to have more children, the US has to make some big changes if they want to stop that demographic timebomb.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

TranscripT

Hey everybody. Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Colorado in between the snows. it is April 25th. And the news. You’re not gonna get this for, like, a week. I know, I’m sorry. the news today is that, the United States Census has come out with the most recent information on population structure for the United States, and it indicates that our birth rate has dropped to a 40 year low of about 1.6 per woman. 

2.1 is generally considered to be replacement level. And if you add in increases in the death rate in the United States from things like Covid, which killed about a million, 4 million, 3,000,004 people, as well as the rapidly aging and therefore passing the baby boomers. And then on top of that, the opiate opioid epidemic. We really need to be closer to 2.3 or 2.4. 

It’s just too cold. The population where it is. the only other way that you can plug that gap was with immigration. Let’s just say that that is a topic that is somewhat hot at the moment. what does this mean? Well, in the short term, from a demographic point of view, short term is 20 years. From a short term point of view, this is actually pause div for economic growth, because if you have a lot of people aged roughly 20 to 45, which is where the millennials are right now and they don’t have a lot of kids, then the money that they would spend on schooling and buying a bigger house, they can use 

for more furnishings and more travel and more restaurants, and more high octane growth that feeds through the system and has a multiplier effect. this is something that we saw in China in the 2000. This is something we saw in Europe in the 1990s. and you can get some really high quality growth out of it. The problem is that you only do that once. 

And if your birth rate never recovers, then after 20 years, you start eating into your working age population, and after 50 years, you start eating into your skilled worker population as well as your tax base. Then eventually you’ll get to a place like where the Germans and the Koreans are now, where this has now been going on for 60 years. 

And so this is the last ten year period that we basically have a modern Korean or German economy, unless something radical shifts more traditionally, having a low birth rate just means that you’re going to have fewer people available to work in the future and fewer people to maintain the system in the future. Now, for the United States, we have a very atypical demographic history compared to really everyone else in the rest of the world. 

compared to the rest of the industrialized world, most of the other industrialized countries are far more urbanized than we are. So they started this collapse below replacement levels not just 20 years ago, but 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, in some cases 80. And so it has a lot of steam built up for us. The decline really below, replacement is only about a 10 to 15 year process, and it’s been very slow even then. 

In addition, because the United States was part of the second cadre of countries to industrialize, we have seen our birth rates go down. But because the United States is such a big place with so many small towns and such huge options for suburbs, it’s declined a lot more slowly than everywhere else. So if you look at the data and we’ll throw a chart up here, you’ll see that the United States has been kind of hugging around that two, 2.1, area for the last 40 years, whereas a lot of other countries that are kind of in are pure class, plunged below it long ago. 

that doesn’t mean that we are doomed to follow them if Americans keep aging at their current rate. If the birth rate keeps dropping at its current rate, we’re not going to be facing a Korean or a German style problem within the next 40 years, and probably closer to 50. so while this isn’t a great sign, it’s not like we’re about to jump off a cliff. 

the other group of countries, the developing countries, are very different. these are the countries that, for the most part, did not develop the technologies of industrialization. It was thrust upon them. So you took a century, a century, a half of technical development in the West and in Japan, and in the course of under 30 years implemented it throughout most of what we now think of as the developing world. 

And so they went directly from the farms to condos and in, in doing so saw their birth rates just plunge horrendously. And you can see that on the chart. China, of course, is the country that industrialized the most quickly got the growth boom from that, from not having a young generation. and now is well past the point of no return and is very close to having one of the lowest birth rates in the world. 

So is there anything we can do about this? Well, there’s two things. The first is you can have meaningful immigration reform in order to bring in more people, but to bring in the scale of people that were required to tilt this, it would be pretty extreme. the second thing you can do is encourage policies that make it easier for younger families to have more kids. 

Part of the economic growth story of places like Texas the last 30 years is that the land is cheap, the electricity is cheap, the food is cheap, and taxes are low. So if you’re a young family starting out, it’s easier to have a house with a yard and raise children. If you’re going to do that in San Francisco, whoo hoo hoo! 

Or New York. Yeah, that’s not going to happen. Raising kids in a condo is no fun at all. one other little thing that I just kind of throw in there so that people understand that everything has a consequence over the same time that US birth rates have dropped since 1990. We’ve also seen the teen pregnancy rate drop by roughly half, and there is a direct correlation between those two things. 

So saying you need more kids makes a lot of sense how you get more kids. That’s what really matters. 

Can High Birth Rates Solve Demographic Problems for Young Countries?

I often talk about the importance of demographics for countries, but do high birth rates always equate to population growth?

In countries like Yemen and Nigeria, high birth rates can look promising, but we need to consider other factors before we start celebrating. The two big ones are infant mortality and life expectancy. As countries begin to industrialize, they start to reap the benefits of improved healthcare, driving up survival rates for children and adults alike. The story is all rainbows and butterflies so far.

However, if these advances in healthcare are heavily reliant on imported technologies, any disruption to international trade could prove devastating. The bottom line is that high and growing birth rates are great, but sustainable population growth requires a bit more work than just popping out some kids.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

TranscripT

Hey everyone. Peter Zeihan here. Coming to you from Colorado. We’re taking a and from lost a limb in the story. Anyway, we’re taking the entry from the Ask Peter Forum. It lets demographics. The question is I talk a lot about declining demographics and the impact that’s going to have. But what about countries that have sky high birthrates? Is this a good is this a bad? 

Is this another thing? The two that come to mind are Yemen and Nigeria, both of which have birth rates that are just ridiculously high. How sustainable is this? What’s the impact? Good question. I generally look at birth rates when I’m looking at more advanced economies where the industrial technologies have been in place for decades. When you’re talking about the younger economies were industrial is Asian is more recent. 

There’s a couple other statistics you need to look at. The first is infant mortality, and especially child mortality under five years of age. See, how likely is it that a child that who’s bored is going to make it to five? And then second is life expectancy overall. You see what happens when a country starts to industrialize is they don’t just get concrete and pavement and buildings and rebar and electricity. 

They also get vaccines and medical care. And this drastically decreases the death rate among the young and drastically increases the average age of mortality among the older folks. So what we’re seeing in Yemen and especially in Nigeria is a steady inroads of these new technologies into the population. So it’s not just that the birth rate is high. Oftentimes for these countries that are early in the early industrializing period, the growth rate is very high. 

The question is whether or not the children survive. And then the question is whether the adults survive. So take the example of China. From roughly 1985 until roughly 2015, the population doubled. But almost all of that population increase wasn’t from organic birth rate. It was because people lived longer. The lifespan basically doubled in that same period. Now, these gains are real. 

These people are more productive. But you only get those sorts of gains once. And now that China has basically wrested all of the gains along Djibouti, it can’t out of the system because they’re coming against the upper level what humans are capable of today. There’s no one to replace them. So even if nothing goes wrong in the system, no financial crisis, no war, no agricultural crisis. 

You’re still looking at a population collapse because people can’t live any longer than they are. And for the last 50 years, people have not been having children. So that inverted funnel, the bottom just goes up and sucks away the entire population. Yemen and Nigeria at a much earlier stage of this process, there’s nothing to say that they’re condemned to the the Chinese end result. 

But keep in mind that in the case of these two countries in particular, most notably Yemen. But all of the technologies that allow them to live longer come from a different continent. And so if anything happens to international trade, you should expect infant mortality to shoot up and life expectancy to collapse. And then they just get sandwiched in between. 

It’s not merely as dark of a story as what we’ve got going on in China, but it’s not exactly a great one. If you’re going to have life expectancy and if you’re going to have infant mortality, be pause, have aspects of your society. You need to be able to be sure that you can produce the technologies that allow it to happen in the first place. 

Otherwise, you’re just as dependent on the rest of the world as if you imported 100% of your oil.

How Shrinking Populations Determine Economic Growth

We tend to overlook the dynamics of demography and its economic impact, so let’s take a step back and break down demographics by generation and how that will dictate the future of our economies.

There are standard behaviors for each age group. You’re born as a ward, but are cheap to take care of. Then you start to become more productive and consume a lot. Then you age into a situation where you’re providing taxes. And then you revert back to your old ways and become a leech on the economy again. Fairly cyclical and predictable.

So in rapidly aging populations like Europe, Korea, Japan and parts of Africa, once you tip that scale towards people consuming more capital than they are producing…you can imagine how well that plays out. There are certain situations where population shifts could benefit an economy, but there’s no silver lining to deep population decline.

Prefer to read the transcript? Click here

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts

TranscripT

Hey everybody Peter Zeihan here coming to you from snowy Colorado today. We’re taking an entry from the Ask Peter column on overpopulation and under population a specifically. The question is, Peter, you talk a lot about population and the negative economic consequences of it. But if we are entering a world where there’s a lot of environmental concern and damage, doesn’t slimming down the population actually argue that we could be headed towards a better world?

In addition, in general, is this going to mean that there’s more resources available for everybody else? Wouldn’t that mean we’re going to have a degree of economic growth that is qualitatively different than what came before? And, you know, there’s some there’s something to that argument. But the problem is that assumes that we lose five, ten, 15, 20%. Pick your number across the world.

Equally of every age group of every country and every ethnicity. That’s not what’s going to happen. So before I go into the nuts and bolts of it, let me kind of give you the overview. As a rule, people under age 18 only can assume things like education, a little bit of health care. They don’t contribute to the working economy.

People aged 18 to 45, these are the folks that are having kids and buying homes and going to school. It’s very heavy consumption. Most of the stuff that you will consume in your lifetime, the greatest proportion of your consumption will happen while you’re raising your kids, which as a rule, ends between 45 and 50 from 45 to 5065.

These are your mature workers. These are the people who are playing, paying lots and lots of taxes. They’re saving for retirement. They’re generating the investment that drives the private sector. And then when you turn 65, you’re still consuming, but your consumption changes dramatically to things like health care and a little bit of leisure. But you’re still occupying your home.

But your tax bill goes way down and now you start drawing pensions and health care benefits that drive government commitment to you through the roof. So you start out being a ward but not being very expensive. You move into being very productive in a lot of consumption. You age into a situation where you’re providing taxes and then eventually age to the point where you’re just this giant sucking sound.

Instead, in the advanced world. We’re not just dealing with the population. We’re dealing with very, very rapid aging. So the population structure for, say, Europe or Korea, Japan in just 15 years is going to be a big bulge of people who have retired but not died. And then a very, very small number of working age adults and even fewer children.

It’s a very different pattern because old people. Let me rephrase that. People of advanced age consume goods, but also consume a huge amount of tax take and health care. And so they are a net drain on the system instead of tax payers like they were in their twenties, thirties, forties, fifties and early sixties. So the pressure on the system is massive.

A good thing. A good example. I can give you a how this imbalance really doesn’t work out is if you look at sub-Saharan Africa, especially southern Africa, during the AIDS epidemic, you had an absolute gutting of the population structure of people roughly aged 18 to 45, leaving you with mature workers and societies where the mature workers weren’t all that skilled and then no one to raise the kids.

And so the block of people 18 to 45. Those are the people who do most of the work, pay a lot of the taxes and absolutely raise the children for the next generation. And we lost their consumption at the same time. So a lot of these countries south of Congo basically faced a 25 year period of economic just despair as their population balance changed.

The part of the world where we’re probably going to be seen that this happened most dramatically. Well, let me give you two. The first one is East Asia. These are places that have seen absolutely massive increases in health care and longevity over the last 50 years. So, for example, I believe the Koreans are now the longest live people in the world, which means that you’re going to have these massive, massive aged populations sucking the government dry while there’s no one down below to do the work, much less raise children.

The other chunk is the Orthodox world, where a combination of the post-Cold War shocks and alcoholism and a poor diet are hollowing out the working age population. Before we get to the point where we have a population collapse, and these are two very different economic models that really don’t go anywhere particularly positive. But there is a lot of nuance and difference between the two.

In the case of East Asia, assuming for the moment that we don’t have an energy or trade breakdown big, if you’re looking at a general degradation of the states ability to function. In the case of Central Europe, you’re instead looking at scene wedges of populations that are actually going to benefit quite a bit from this because if you lose everyone in the thirties, but you still have people in your fifties, you still the tax base, you still have the work and the economic inequality that will erupt in that sort of environment suggests a significant political challenge.

So everyone has their own story, but it’s really hard to make the case that deep population has a silver lining and the environmental case. Keep in mind that if people age, they’re still consuming. You’ve just lost the younger generation that can pay the taxes and generate the investment that’s necessary to maybe transition to something that isn’t based on oil and coal.

So there’s really no upside here. There are just flavors of downside.

My Latest Interview on the NAIOP Podcast: Inside CRE

For those looking for some longer format content, here’s a recent interview from the NAIOP Podcast: Inside CRE.

LISTEN TO THE NAIOP PODCAST

I chatted with Christopher Ware about current U.S. demographic shifts, how the labor force is changing, and why now is the best time for businesses to hire and borrow. I also dive into China’s precipitous population decline, how the cost of manufactured goods will increase, and why we need to double the size of the industrial plant in North America.

I encourage you to tune in if you want a well-rounded, long-form discussion.

Here at Zeihan On Geopolitics we select a single charity to sponsor. We have two criteria:

First, we look across the world and use our skill sets to identify where the needs are most acute. Second, we look for an institution with preexisting networks for both materials gathering and aid distribution. That way we know every cent of our donation is not simply going directly to where help is needed most, but our donations serve as a force multiplier for a system already in existence. Then we give what we can.

Today, our chosen charity is a group called Medshare, which provides emergency medical services to communities in need, with a very heavy emphasis on locations facing acute crises. Medshare operates right in the thick of it. Until future notice, every cent we earn from every book we sell in every format through every retailer is going to Medshare’s Ukraine fund.

And then there’s you.

Our newsletters and videologues are not only free, they will always be free. We also will never share your contact information with anyone. All we ask is that if you find one of our releases in any way useful, that you make a donation to Medshare. Over one third of Ukraine’s pre-war population has either been forced from their homes, kidnapped and shipped to Russia, or is trying to survive in occupied lands. This is our way to help who we can. Please, join us.

Support medshare's ukraine fund
Support medshare's global efforts