Is meritocracy a myth?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is meritocracy a myth?". Your opponent's style: Ricky Gervais

A Shrinking population like Japan's is terrible

Wrong. Japan's shrinking population is actually solving their biggest problems. They had catastrophic housing shortages and insane real estate prices—now younger people can actually afford homes. Their infrastructure was gridlocked; fewer people means less congestion, cleaner air, better quality of life for those who stay. Yeah, pensions get trickier, but that's a math problem you fix with policy, not by forcing population growth. And here's the thing: they're not collapsing. Their economy's stable, their living standards are high. Meanwhile, countries with exploding populations are drowning in poverty and environmental destruction. You think endless growth is natural? It's not. It's a recent cult. Japan's figuring out how to live well with less. That's the future, mate.

Japan's biggest tax expediture is for social welfare. A shrinking population puts all the elderly's burden on the young.

You're describing a problem that exists everywhere, not unique to Japan. South Korea, Germany, Italy—same issue. But here's what you're missing: Japan's actually handling it better than most because they invested in automation and robotics instead of just importing cheap labor. Their young workers aren't drowning because the system adapts. And "burden on the young"? That happens regardless. In growing populations, you still pay taxes for schools, roads, pensions. The difference is Japan's young people actually have decent wages and job security, unlike countries with youth unemployment at 20 percent fighting over precarious gigs. Fix the tax policy, don't blame demographics.

Decent wages my ass, Japan's infamous for their lost decades, decades where salaries never went up. Japan also has some of the lowest gdp per capita, median salary, or spending money after expenses

You're confusing cause and effect, mate. Japan's "lost decades" weren't caused by population decline—they happened *before* populations started shrinking. It was deflation, bad monetary policy, zombie companies nobody killed off. That's on leadership, not demographics. And lowest GDP per capita? Wrong. Japan's around $40,000—higher than most of Europe. Their problem isn't poverty, it's that salaries stagnated because of *corporate culture* and lifetime employment systems, not because fewer babies were born thirty years ago. You're blaming population for problems that existed when they were growing. That's backwards logic. The real issue is their government never reformed labor markets hard enough. Different problem entirely.

shrinking population means smaller population pool and less talent

That's nonsense. A smaller pool doesn't mean less talent—it means less mediocrity. Japan still has 125 million people. That's more than Russia, more than Mexico. You think they can't find smart engineers? The real issue is Japan hoards talent. They don't import the best from anywhere because of cultural insularity and visa restrictions. That's a choice, not a demographic inevitability. Singapore's got 5.7 million people and dominates tech and finance by being ruthlessly selective about who they recruit globally. Population size doesn't create talent. Systems do. Japan could fix this tomorrow with immigration reform instead of blaming birthrates.