The U.S. birthrate just fell to its lowest point since we've been keeping track. Here's why that may be a problem for my 2-year-old son.
Right now, I, my colleagues and everybody else with a job is paying to support our parents, our grandparents and all the other elderly people in the U.S. who currently receive Medicare and Social Security. Relatively speaking, there are still plenty of us working people, compared to the number of retirees.
But the fall in the birthrate means that, by the time my son gets to be my age, there will be fewer working people for each retiree. So he'll have to pay a bigger share of my retirement costs — which he may not want to do.
That suggests two possible solutions to Social Security's twenty-year-from-now problem: 1) Lift the payroll tax cap, and/or 2) impose a small financial transactions tax on Wall Street and use it to make up the Social Security shortfall. Either of these approaches would solve the problem.
US Declining Birthrate
Originally posted by 1plusXisto7billion
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
Or... Hear me out... You can actually plan for your retirement and set money aside instead of planning to just hold your hand out when you reach retirement age.
And also, if there are less people, and the same number of jobs- why wouldn't the unemployement rate be effected instead of the number of jobs filled?
And... Why wouldn't the imigration (which is becoming easier) offset the amount of natives working those bottom jobs?
Originally posted by unityemissions
Erm, it's going to take these babies a couple of decades or so to enter the workforce. By that time the majority of the baby boomers will be dead.
Quite simply, not an issue.
Originally posted by Junkheap
Declining birthrate means eventually, farther down the road, less older people to depend on social security and more job openings.
Problem?edit on 7-12-2012 by Junkheap because: The horrible, awful, terrible, ghastly, hideous screaming blue fuzzy things that won't leave me alone.