The unemployment rate doesn't capture the scope of the issue. That's true in the US and Europe too. It doesn't capture people who are undermployed, locked into lower-paid positions, have to juggle multiple casual/part-time jobs and end up doing "gig" work, which is often sub-minimum wage once you factor in depreciation.

As for Japan, in particular, we have the Lost Decades [1], where the 1980s asset bubble collapsed and the economy stagnated for 20 years. Part of this was cultural too. For all of the faults of the US banking system at the time (eg the S&L crisis), the FDIC's approach is to take over failing banks whereas Japan let essentially bankrupt banks exist and gum up the economy. They are known as zombie banks [2]. You had zombie companies too and the entire thing largely came down to avoiding a loss of face by declaring bankruptcy, restructing or doing mass layoffs.

For over a decade, you had the "employment ice age" [3], which essentially destroyed GenX at the time they'd otherwise be starting families. This continued into the 2010s with the millenial generation.

Young people aren't stupid. They can look at their environment and increasingly realize they'll have no work-life balance, be lucky to find a good job, get paid enough to live on that job, won't own a house and can't afford to have a family. I call this a crisis in hopelessness. I also think this underpins how consumer spending has remained relatively strong. People are living for experiences rather than saving for a future because they have no future.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Ice_Age

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_bank

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Ice_Age

> Blaming ... is literally insane.

> Your pet theories about how economies work should probably be grounded in more than 5 minutes of taking whatever bullshit you read on the internet as truth

Hey, commenting like this on HN is not cool, as the guidelines make very clear. Please remind yourself of the guidelines and make an effort to observe them if you want to keep participating here. These ones in particular should be heeded:

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

People linking LLM spam are not conversing curiously in any meaningful sense. When that LLM spam is used to blame all of a country's problems on a tiny minority of the population, I feel zero obligation to treat such a position with respect. Indeed, treating it with respect legitimises it. The person I was responding to might as well have said "Germany's economy is stagnating and fertility rate is declining because of the Jews" for how ridiculous their position is, and mine is the one that is violating guidelines for calling that out? Give me a break. I'll get off of your website.

The defiant flouncing isn't necessary, thanks. The guidelines are well established and apply no matter who or what you're replying to. If that weren't the case there would be no point having guidelines at all. It's fine to correct an incorrect fact or a bad source. You don't even have to treat a position with respect. You do have to treat other people with basic courtesy. Reaching for a Nazism analogy takes this interaction well beyond any bounds of decency, and also relevance; the parent commenter wasn't "blaming" anyone, at least not any minorities. This is only a site people think is a good place for discussing anything because enough people hold themselves to higher standards that this.