Bait That Doesn't Reach: Maintaining the Fish Tank and a Lost Route to the Ocean - 1/02/2026

Summary

Why isn't the "investment" aimed at halting the declining birthrate bearing the expected fruits? The reason lies in the contradiction that the passion and funds we pour into it are being wasted on "maintaining" a story that has already been completed, preventing the "starting" of a new one. Our passion for caring for the fish in our fish tanks is puncturing the hulls of the boats of young people setting out into the unknown ocean—this ironic situation is unraveled from a cool, objective perspective.

Keywords

Declining birthrate, resource allocation, unmarried people, intergenerational gap, marginal utility

A full fish tank, an empty fishing rod

A fisherman decided to increase the number of fish in his lake. Every day, he continued to provide generous amounts of the finest food to the fish he had already caught and which were swimming happily in his fish tank. Nearby, young people who have never caught a fish stand there, rusty fishing rods in hand, with no money to buy bait.

Many of the policies we call "countermeasures to combat declining birthrates" resemble the behavior of these fishermen.

At first glance, providing additional support (by providing subsidies) to people who already have families and are embarking on the voyage of child-rearing seems like the right kind of "support." But what if that funding is being squeezed out of the wallets of people who haven't even set sail yet?

The value of every drop diluted to its limit

Here, we must face a brutal truth: even if we provide additional support to "families who already have children," the probability of a new life being born into those families drops sharply with each passing birth.

Such support is of great value in terms of providing stability to families' lives and improving the quality of their children's education. However, compared to the original goal of "increasing the number of new lives," it is an extremely inefficient investment. Adding water to a full glass will only overflow, providing no relief to someone standing there thirsting.

Additional Results = Inflow of Support ÷ Recipient's Current Sufficiency

An Invisible Barrier to Entry

Meanwhile, on the piers facing the ocean, many young people are stranded, unable to pay the "toll to go out to sea." For them, the decision to get married and have children has become a "luxury challenge" requiring a huge initial investment, rather than the natural step it once was.

By concentrating resources on making the inside of our fishponds luxurious, we have closed the doors to the sea.

The Vanishing Potential of "New Stories"

If we redirected the "tenth feast" for those who already have families to the "first step" of a young person still dining alone, how many new stories could have begun?

The current system further protects those who are already successful, preventing those who would like to take on new challenges. This is like using the bait needed to catch new fish as ornamental ornaments for fish already caught.

Lost Potential = Support Lost to Maintain Existing × Number of People Who Give Up

Conclusion: Decline in the Name of Maintenance

We hide behind the undeniable shield of righteousness—"helping current families"—and turn a blind eye to the most pressing issue: "new beginnings."

Of course, protecting the smiles of the children in front of us is important. But if the price for protecting those smiles is someone else's permanent abandonment of their dream of becoming a parent, does that society have a future?

We need to realize that the purpose of current policies has shifted from "increasing the number of new lives" to simply "extending the lifespan of existing systems." No matter how well-maintained our fishponds are, unless new life arrives from the sea, the waters will one day quietly become murky and run out.

True Decline = Clinging to the Security of the Vested + Lack of Investment in the Unknown