Global Aging Out

Published July 9, 2025

Whether we’re blessed with “first world problems” or just trying to stay alive, we all must limit what we focus on just to get through the day. We focus on work. We focus on our health. We focus on that next exciting event we have scheduled. We focus on that fast-approaching first grandchild. We must focus simply because we humans cannot take in everything all of the time. And even if we could, that sounds miserable.

This blessing regarding our limited focus also means that it is possible for important topics to be missed. When something is not immediately “in our face,” tectonic shifts can be missed. For the remainder of this article, the tectonic shifts I’m focused on are national demographics – specifically everyone’s age.

In 2017, Elon Musk tweeted about a then-recent document discussing population implosion. His actual quote was “The world’s population is accelerating towards collapse, but few seem to notice or care.” People laughed at this as absurd. Why? Well, for most of my lifetime, people have told stories, given speeches, and made movies about overpopulation and vanishing resources. And yet, this realization regarding population shifts and the coming implosions have finally started showing up in mainstream media as a legitimate topic. Now, many are starting to factor this issue into their planning. Still, a noticeable number of people remain generally unaware of what this will mean in coming years.

If you are part of the world that has not yet picked up on this new narrative, let me share with you some relevant numbers. All of these figures need to be seen in relation to the 2.1 fertility rate benchmark for maintaining a population size. In other words, if women across a population have less than 2.1 children on average, then that population will decrease over time. 

South Korea’s fertility rate is 0.72.  Japan’s fertility rate is higher at 1.26, but Japan’s low rate has been impacting their population numbers over a longer period of time. Italy is 1.2, and Russia (without factoring in the war losses) is 1.5. Remember! Anything less than 2.1 means the population will shrink. Currently, over 125 countries have fertility rates below the 2.1 target for just maintaining a population.

With these numbers, the most obvious problem regarding the impact of low fertility rates was (and is) China’s “one child policy” in place from 1979 through 2015. The results of that policy have proven to be multifaceted and overwhelmingly negative. But when focusing solely on the total actual number of people, it is believed that between now and 2050, China’s population will likely decrease by 200 million+/-. However, while that is over half the entire population of the United States, that decrease isn’t even the entire story.

The central question is “What is the composition of those making up the remaining population?” More specifically, “Do you have enough young people to work and make the economy run, and will that economy support all of the old people?”

At least a few people in Bosque County will think, “Well, I’m sure glad that problem is way over there!” Fair enough. However, the issue is relevant for everyone. The nature of population composition makes it challenging to fully appreciate the weight of this without intentional thought and research. Luckily, we do live in central Texas, which is one of the best places a person could pick. Even so, we’re not replacing ourselves either – especially in rural Texas.

But all in all, Texas fares well with its own fertility rate of 1.8, high net migration, and a younger, diverse population. Over the next 25 years, Texas will face moderate negative impacts from an aging population and rural depopulation, but our economic vitality and demographic diversity only reduces the severity of the problem compared to global trends. Texas is unlikely to experience the severe population implosion seen in countries like Japan, Korea, or even Ukraine. 

Beyond the likely sustained migration coming our way, we will need to seriously consider targeted policies, like improving rural healthcare. Simply put, this is just one more big topic that is easy to miss, unless we pay attention and then figure out what we need to do before it’s too late.

And surprise! Some people see humanoid robots as a way out of the coming problems with shrinking workforces. This may seem unlikely at first glance. And yet, start watching for the speed and capabilities of the robots in current development. The entire humanoid robot idea and the massive investments being made right now may start to make even more sense. This is especially true with entire nations looking for ways around the population implosions. 

While this is not a prediction, there is a possible future scenario where the success of humanoid robots could actually help avoid a world war. Why? The severe negative implications of shrinking demographics have led to conflict before.

From 1618 to 1648, the central European conflict known as the Thirty Years’ War was driven by massive population losses. The war compounded the problem, and the resulting demographic collapse destabilized the region, fueling further conflicts as states struggled to recover.

Bottom line, watch for what nations do as they come to grips with significant population decreases. Specifically, pay attention to whether robots are used as part of the solution. Whether this happens or not, it’s about to get really interesting.

 

And beyond this, let’s see what’s next!

J Matt Wallace