Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: baby boomers

Obama/Biden and Romney/Ryan Issues

Before tomorrow’s election, let’s take a look at the voting age gap. Absent since 1972, the young and the old again are voting differently.

Large in 1972 and then Absent until 2004, the Generation Voting Gap Is Back

 

The Silent Generation: The oldest slice of the population, the Silent Generation was born between 1928 and 1945. Representing 17% of all registered voters at the end of 2011, they tend toward conservative views, support less government, and are politically engaged. One of their top issues, Social Security, reflects a contradiction. The Silents tend to be Republican but favor the Democrats’ position on Social Security.

The Baby Boomers: Currently 47-65, the Baby Boomers are a potent political cohort. Numbering 37% of all registered voters, the older Boomers tend to be more Democratic than their younger peers. The concern, though, that resounds for many is uncertainty about their financial future and retirement security.

Generation X: Born between 1965 and 1980, Xers make up 26% of all registered voters. Politically, they tend to split by age. Older Xers sympathize with Republicans while those closer to 30 are more likely to vote Democratic. As for the issue they most care about, it appears to be financial health.

The Millennials: The youngest population group that votes, Millennials are currently 18 to 30 years old. relatively unengaged politically, and 17% of the electorate. 41 percent nonwhite or Hispanic, they are diverse, vote Democratic, and are almost evenly split on whether we have too much or too little government. According to a July 2012 USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, creating good jobs was the key issue for those under 30.

How to summarize the similarities and differences? I suggest looking at the table below. Although it is based on data from October 2011, still the priorities remain similar according to the more recent Gallup poll. And, for more background data, the graphs that follow it are fascinating.

Election Economics Topics:

 

Sources and Resources: The surveys on which I based my facts were from Pew (Nov. 2011) and USA TODAY Gallup (July 2012). Also, you might have some fun with this USA TODAY candidate match game. All graphs and tables are from Pew.

The Generational Divide is Reflected in Voting Preferences

The Generational Divide and Presidential Favorities

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

At the beginning of yesterday’s QE3 press conference, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke referred to the plight of savers. Similarly, during an August “Conversation With the Chairman,” Dr. Bernanke was asked, “What about the savers?”

Both times, Dr. Bernanke had the same response. “Obviously interest rates are very low. They are low for a good reason…our economy is still in a fragile recovery…low interest rates are….to help the economy recover [and] restore more normal levels of employment and growth in our economy.”

What if, though, you have $360,000 in savings? Retired, you depend on the return from your investment. With a 5% return, you might have gotten $18,000 annually from certificates of deposit (CDs) in addition to maybe $18,000 from social security. Each month, you would have received $3000. Now, that CD return is close to zero and your monthly income plummets.

This takes us to the baby boomers.

Every month, for the next 17 1/2 years, 10,000 baby boomers will celebrate their 65th birthday. Pew Research says boomers feel 9 years younger than their chronological age and consider 72 the threshold of old age. I wonder though, how retired boomers are feeling about QE3, especially with food and gas prices rising. (Please see the ground beef graph below. Since January, 2008, ground beef has risen from $2.73 a pound to $3.45 during July 2012.)

So when, Chairman Bernanke says that his goal is very low interest rates until 2016, you can see the tradeoff. Lower interest rates are supposed to target the corporate borrowing that creates more jobs, fuels expansion, elevates tax revenue and buoys stock prices. But many senior savers pay the cost.

Sources and Resources: Talking about the plight of savers, the NY Timeshere and USA Today, here do a good job of conveying the cost of QE3. To see how Dr. Bernanke commented, here is a WSJ blog and his ‘Conversation With the Chairman” talk.  Finally, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) was my source for price information while here is Pew Research data on baby boomers.

The Price Per Pound of Ground Chuck Beef, January 2002-January 2012

Source: BLS

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Obama/Biden and Romney/Ryan Issues

If you lined up everyone in the United States by age, the middle person would be close to 37.1 years old. In 1850, the median age was 19, for 2000 close to 35 and by 2050, we expect that middle individual will be 41. Accelerated by baby boomers who started passing 65 last year, our population is aging.

How old we are makes a huge difference. Past a certain age, most of us are less creative, less productive and less healthy. In baseball, the average age of most MVPs has been just before age 30 and almost no one after 35. The “best” work from Nobel Prize winners tends to peak in their late 30s. For more typical occupations like office workers, managers,  salesmen and saleswomen, one study indicated that productivity slips during people’s mid-40s.

What does it mean, then, for our society if the average age is climbing? One result is that 13% all government spending ( a huge proportion) is going to Medicare. Created in 1965, Medicare is medical insurance for everyone over 65, for disabled Americans and for end-stage kidney failure treatment. A healthcare network ranging from physicians to hospital bed rental companies is paid with Medicare money. On the other end, workers pay for most of Medicare with 2.9% of their paychecks (split 1.45/1.45 with employers). Additional funds come from income taxes, the Medicare trust fund and enrollee premiums.

According to the Trustees of the Medicare trust fund, the system is heading toward disaster. Depleted by 2024, the Medicare trust fund (created with surplus Medicare money when it existed) will no longer supplement any funding shortfall. Meanwhile, with so many baby boomers, there will be an insufficient revenue stream from Medicare payroll taxes. A second rarely mentioned consideration is that Medicare recipients have a very good deal. Estimated at a 3 to 1 ratio, the amount people receive from the system vastly exceeds what they paid during a lifetime.

Predictably, the Medicare challenge takes us to very different responses. President Obama refers to the projected cost savings of the Affordable Care Act (2010). By contrast, the Romney-Ryan team looks to vouchers that let program participants “spend” on care as they wish. Since both policies can easily be criticized, again it comes down to the approach you prefer…more or less government?

This post used facts and ideas from the Trustees Report on Medicare, a superb Teaching Company lecture (#13, Modern Economic Issues) from economist Robert Whaples and some of my median age data came from the CIA factbook. In addition, I do recommend playing with this interactive graph of median age changes from 1950 to 2050 and this excellent interactive graphic that displays medical spending categories and “who pays.”

And finally, one interesting fact– Demographers expect Japan to have a median age close to 55 in 2050. What would it mean to have half your population above 50?!

Election Economics Topics:

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

safety net..16712_5.28_000006090065XSmall

When you combine better health care with generous pensions you get (choose one):

  • happy retirees
  • happy politicians
  • insufficiently funded national pension programs
  • the eurozone
  • the United States
  • other

 

To select an answer let’s begin with 1935. Just passed, the Social Security Act will start giving benefits to people 65 and older in several years. With 41.9 workers for every retiree in 1945 and 16.5 in 1950, the revenue source was more than sufficient. Moreover, life expectancy was 58 for men and 62 for women. (Adults who reached 21 did have a 50-60 percent chance of reaching 65 and beyond.)

Fast forward to 2012. The average man lives until approximately 76 and the average woman, 81. The worker retiree ratio for 2012 is 2.8. And as more baby boomers retire, it will get worse.

The Social Security Trustees just announced that because current workers’ checks could not cover retirees’ obligations, the system had a deficit during 2010, 2011 and probably for 2012. The good news is that they have a Trust Fund to cover deficits. The bad new is that the Trust Fund will probably be empty in 2033. That means benefits will have to plunge or taxes soar or the age of eligibility change. Or maybe the unexpected will occur and all will remain okay.

More daunting, in Europe, by age 55, more than one third of the population of all countries has retired except for Sweden, Denmark and Finland. You know the eurozone situation– huge pension obligations, free access to health care, retirement length averaging 13-20 years, and unemployment averaging 10.8 percent in February.

Returning to the quiz, what might you fill in for “other?”

You might want to look at this historical chart of worker beneficiary ratios since 1945, pp. 52-53 in Trustees 2012 report and at the chart of life expectancy for Social Security in one of their historical documents. For Europe, I got my statistics from this article which uses Eurostats as its source.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

16443_6.20_000007462309XSmall

Ask a 56-year old and a 26-year old about Social Security and you will probably get very different answers. 

In the NY Times, an unemployed 56 year old woman said: “My investments took a bath, then being out of work for a few years–I’m sorry but there’s not that much left. I’m going to need Social Security and Medicare.” However, in order to get the amount of Social Security she expects, a 26 year old could expect to pay a higher payroll tax.

When? In 2030, she will be 75 and the 26 year old will be 45.

Almost doubling since 1990, the number of retirees is surging. However, the number of taxpayers is up by much less. As a result, by 2036, Social Security will be unable to fulfill its promised obligations. The “old” worry about their benefits. Because Social Security is “pay-as-you-go,” the “young” are concerned about paying for them. The NY Times called it “Between Young and Old, a Political Collision.”

The Economic Lesson

Cut benefits? These are several approaches:

  • Reduce what upper income earners would receive.
  • Increase the retirement age.
  • Reduce cost-of-living increases in benefits.

Increase Taxes? These are possibilities:

  • Tax all that people earn instead of the cap on taxable income that now exists.
  • Select a much higher cap on taxable income than now exists.
  • Increase the payroll tax rate from 12.4% to 14.4%.

Or, just wait and see if economic growth solves the problem?

Using this interactive WSJ graphic, you can see the impact of different policy alternatives.

An Economic Question: If Republicans reject tax increases and Democrats refuse to cut benefits, how would you get the Congress to act?

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment