Comments for Wealthy Countries May Become Less Crowded and the NYT Wants Us to Be Scared at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.cepr.net Fri, 24 May 2013 18:33:08 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/wealthy-countries-may-become-less-crowded-and-the-nyt-wants-us-to-be-scared#comment-1826 Wouldn't compulsory military service for those over 65 shift the cost burden away from entitlements to defense (an expense that always seems necessary), while improve the age retiree to worker ratio? - Union Member Sat, 31 Jul 2010 08:42:27 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/wealthy-countries-may-become-less-crowded-and-the-nyt-wants-us-to-be-scared#comment-1818 Actually the rate of population growth in the U.S. decreased steadily until the 30's when it reached a minimum, then kicked up just before WW II, dropped during the war, then picked up again and dropped in the 70's. The rate at the time Social Security began was only a little higher than it is today, so the the current rate is not a new problem, and the baby boom has already been taken care of with the Trust Fund. What has changed drastically since the late 30's is the rate of wage growth: http://www.skeptometrics.org/WeeklyWages/WeeklyWages.htm It is this wage growth which will really determine the level of SS payments in the future, and to some extent public healthcare expenditures. Assuming immigration levels remain the same, the demographics involved are fairly predictable for 20 years or so and wages are the significant variable. Wage growth is not just a matter of total GDP, but of other aspects of public policy, and as Dean has been saying for a long time, public policy has been captured by those who want to keep wages down. - skeptonomist Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:38:08 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/wealthy-countries-may-become-less-crowded-and-the-nyt-wants-us-to-be-scared#comment-1817 Wealthy countries, desparate for solutions to problems of declining population growth, have taken a cue from Arizona and declared all immigrants, illegal or otherwise, to be luxury goods on the same level as economists have defined children everywhere in wealthy countries as high cost additions to the population. As for health care, it has been declared a Giffen Good, a luxury good of such high order that more of it is consumed as price increases, like potatoes in the Irish food famine, which produces an upward sloping demand curve that explodes economic models. Combining the two is the win-win solution said one economist. It's like third world countries that have lots of children to support the family. Now the wealthy countries can use their own children or substitute immigrant children to provide them with homemade health care. - izzatzo Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:37:16 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/wealthy-countries-may-become-less-crowded-and-the-nyt-wants-us-to-be-scared#comment-1816 For those really concerned about dropping birth rates in the U.S. there is an instant solution; increased immigration. This is an instant solution because it bypasses the child-rearing years and puts willing workers into the economy immediately. The birth rate among immigrants also tends to be higher. If the immigrants are illegal and use phony or stolen SS numbers, so much the better for citizens; payroll taxes will be deducted and the money will not be paid back to the illegals. They can't avoid paying sales taxes and real estate taxes (through rents) which are what actually pay for schools and other local services. - skeptonomist Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:07:19 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/wealthy-countries-may-become-less-crowded-and-the-nyt-wants-us-to-be-scared#comment-1815 The underlying problem is healthcare costs, not aging. If we can fix the healthcare problem, that is, bring costs down to the level of the rest of the world, we won't have a cost problem. If we can't do this, we will have a major cost problem. The issue of who pays masks the problem. If govt doesn't pay, individuals will have to. This just brings us back to the question of costs. - foosion Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:18:48 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/wealthy-countries-may-become-less-crowded-and-the-nyt-wants-us-to-be-scared#comment-1812 sorry, but i find this post disingenuous- it says there is "no obvious reason" for concern with aging, but then goes on to infer an obvious concern is healthcare cost!?- it then goes on to imply that this is a subjunctive problem because if we were progressive, the problem would be less worrisome!?- no need for the mental gymnastics one needs to follow the logic of this post, ill put it bluntly: when the boomers hit the age when chronic disease becomes symptomatic, our public heatlthcare system will go bankrupt- this is a ridiculously obvious reason to become sober (contextual pun intended) about the aging population and to instantiate single payer, or else we risk the current system disintegratiing into healthcare for those who can afford, and suffering for those who can't - frankenduf Sat, 31 Jul 2010 03:52:11 +0100