I hear that welcoming migrants is a great way to address this problem...

Which is the plot to Idiocracy and why the movie is no longer a fantasy and it is now a prophecy.

Tying the mortgage repayment rate to the median salary of a single individual would go some way towards fixing things then, but that would mean putting price caps on houses which would devalue the currency and also need anti-cartel laws (eg. Laws mandating a maximum amount of homes one can own, as cartels might see artificially low prices as an opportunity to buy up more houses).

Artificially constraining parts of banking and all of residential real estate is likely to have other unforeseen effects on the economy, but may still be worth it.

Another alternative is starting a state bank in which citizens can be part of a rent-to-own mortgage, with minimum but achievable life time repayments. If they don't meet those minimum payments, the house is sold and the profit from the sale is portioned out between the state bank and the mortgage payer in proportion to how much % they paid off.

That's a win win, as theyre probably getting a big cash payment when struggling, and the state bank then gets to relist the home.

It certainly can, if properly managed. But that's not profitable, so we don't do it.

Experts blamed fewer marriages in recent years due to the fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic…

It’s 2025. Can we please stop using Covid as a catch-all excuse?

Frankly, I LOVE the idea of cartel laws for ownership of residences.

I know the left really (and rightfully) hates capitalism, but this isn't a capitalism problem; it's a society problem. You'll always need a certain amount of labor to sustain non-working portions of the populations. Thanks to advances in technology the necessary working person percentage is decreasing but you still can't have the majority of the population be elderly people who will never again be productive.

I read it as people with family history in Japan, but living in Brazil and wanting to move to Japan.

I'm guessing that they mean extending access to Japanese citizenship to descendants of Japanese expats abroad. Brazil in particular had a substantial wave of Japanese settlers in the early 1900s.

Carrying capacity of the earth is something like 15 billion with current technology, our wastefulness and overconsumption (of the rich, globally speaking) is the problem. Which reduction in population can mitigate, but not fix

This. I could in theory get japanese citizenship but only if my grandpa had registered my mother when she was born, and she had registered me. But if you miss that, no more chances

Who mentioned black people?

Japan will literally collapse into fire before they allow immigration

incoherent Japanese screeching

That's a win win, as theyre probably getting a big cash payment when struggling, and the state bank then gets to relist the home.

I like your ideas, but where do they live once they get foreclosed on by the State?

Other system are more stable, Egypt lasted for thousands of years, the Ottoman Empire was fairly stable without growth for a 1000. Capitalism is the the system were part of the profit is reinvested into new machinery 'for efficiency' to undercut competition. Once we do not have competition because there are only 2 or 3 companies (Coke and Pepsi), they fix prices and work to corrupt government to become an Oligarchy. This is why people make the state that we are entering a 'post capital' world.

But do we want to keep heading to capacity? We could have artificial scarcity eliminated with wealth redistribution and waste reduction (cars, fast fashion, many many etc). The more humans on the earth, the less possible this becomes.

I think it's entirely possible if we reduce waste and redistribute wealth. The US pays farmers to NOT grow food to keep the price up. Total insanity.

Egypt lasted for thousands of years,

It's called "ancient Egypt" for convenience's sake, but it's not just one continuous state; it's many states that either succeeded or competed with each other as the country went through cycles of rise, decline, fragmentation and reunification. For a more familiar example think of it as another, much smaller China.

the Ottoman Empire was fairly stable without growth for a 1000.

Uh... No?

If wage growth went up at the same rate as GDP, one part time worker could support multiple elderly people

Then prices would have to go up at the same rate, and one part time worker would not be able to support multiple elderly people at a reasonable quality of life. It's not about money; under capitalism money is a shorthand for how much power one has in and over society and isn't directly convertible into useful goods at a constant rate. What you need to be looking at is total productivity, because that's the bottleneck here. If X working people can only make Y things a day and X+Z people need 2Y things a day to survive then a society with X working people and Z non-working people can't survive.