• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Cost to Retire Comfortably Around the World

When I entered the job market, there was a recession and you took the job you could get. People will think I was lucky to be born when I was, and yes I am in many ways, but it was not all chocolate and roses.
 
When I entered the job market, there was a recession and you took the job you could get.

Statistics Canada put it this way,

Youth Unemployment Pressures: As large baby boom cohorts started hitting working age, youth unemployment remained a prominent structural challenge, lingering at elevated levels following peaks near 11% in the early 1970s.

 
How many of those younger (entry level?) workers are actually being blocked by older workers who delay retirement?

Researchers from the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy investigated the claim that delayed retirement will cause higher unemployment for younger workers in the US (Munnell & Wu, 2013). They used population survey data for individuals aged 20 to 64 collected between 1977 and 2011, and found no evidence for claims that the presence of older workers reduces opportunities or wages for younger workers, even considering gender and education levels.

Do.older_.workers.squeeze.out_.younger.workers_2.pdf (The Stanford Study mentioned above)

What may be the more significant driver that affects "entry level" hiring.

https://archive.ph/AeMuX (non paywall)


While skilled trades may still (for a while) be somewhat immune from AI (so far a computer is not as skilled at swinging a hammer as a person), some of the skills and experiences that are supplemental to many jobs - decision making and customer service - are developed in entry level positions which may be eliminated by automation. Where will a worker develop necessary person to person business skills when she/he no longer learns that important first question "do you want fries with that"?

1790021519290.png
 
Yes, I believe there is a moral obligation to step aside eventually.

A healthy society cannot allow one generation to indefinitely occupy positions of power, influence, wealth, and opportunity while younger generations wait on the sidelines. Every generation has a responsibility not only to build for the future, but also to make room for those who will inherit it.

Many of today's seniors came of age during a period of unprecedented economic growth and opportunity. Housing was more affordable, education was less expensive, and it was often easier to build wealth and establish a career. They were given opportunities that many younger people can only dream of today.

I sympathize with those who, despite those advantages, were unable to achieve financial security. Some experienced hardship, bad luck, illness, or circumstances beyond their control. Compassion for those individuals is important.

However, public policy cannot be built solely around preserving the status quo for one generation. If maintaining the comfort and influence of the old comes at the expense of the prospects of the young, then we are sacrificing the future to protect the past.

At some point, leadership, authority, and opportunity must pass to the next generation. That is not ageism. It is the natural and necessary cycle of a healthy society. A society that refuses to make room for its youth eventually stagnates, because the people who must live in the future are denied the chance to shape it.
Eventually, when you’re ready and not a day before.

Like this guy…

IMG_0782.jpeg
 
Back
Top