as more and more diseases become long-term chronic instead of fatal, and symptoms of ultimately fatal chronic diseases are limited. Many cancers will go that way. Better treatment of heart disease. Vastly better treatment of Diabetes 2.
It isn't just that more people will last beyond 65. it's that many more of those who reach 65 will last well into their 80s.
With birth rates in developed nations continuing to stabilizing at such low levels, this is likely to get very messy. The average total fertility rate in the US peaked at 3.7 in the late 1950s. It's now 1.8.
It has both within and between country implications, so it's whichever is more important to you. I tend to focus more on within country changes ( or focus on the developed world), so I'm not too enamored with it.
whether other countries catch up to us doesn't really help with the problem of who will support us when the larger proportion of people aren't working.
foreign workers will produce higher quality goods, if more of our population is retired or working in service sectors, but that's a relatively minor effect.
I would think no big deal...Unemployment is high as workers die off, new blood takes their place, filling gaps...that being said you do have tech. improvements that will continue to put preasure on jobs long term.
The bigger issue is less people means less demand for goods. Lots of houses/apartments may be vacant.
Japan will be interesting to watch in this regard...they have a very large elderly population.
That all three of those nations were the Axis powers in WWII. I'm sure there is some interesting analysis that explains this in regards to these three being currently on the list.
But overall the problem is that you have a huge postwar boon of population that is retiring and overall growth is subsiding as fewer people have children and those that do have essentially replacement level families (ie two people having two children).
Historically population growth has been held in check in one way or the other by extensive wars and occasional famine and bouts of diseases.
That homemade crap with too much sugar that your aunt brings to family reunions.
When different performance metrics of countries increase relatively more to other countries. GDP (levels and per-capita, ...), etc.
And it's typically a poorly used metric by most people when you hear about it in newspapers.
Quote:
?
When different performance metrics of countries increase relatively more to other countries. GDP (levels and per-capita, ...), etc.
Thank you.
Is this important in the context of the OP?
It isn't just that more people will last beyond 65. it's that many more of those who reach 65 will last well into their 80s.
With birth rates in developed nations continuing to stabilizing at such low levels, this is likely to get very messy. The average total fertility rate in the US peaked at 3.7 in the late 1950s. It's now 1.8.
The bigger issue is less people means less demand for goods. Lots of houses/apartments may be vacant.
Japan will be interesting to watch in this regard...they have a very large elderly population.
But overall the problem is that you have a huge postwar boon of population that is retiring and overall growth is subsiding as fewer people have children and those that do have essentially replacement level families (ie two people having two children).
Historically population growth has been held in check in one way or the other by extensive wars and occasional famine and bouts of diseases.
When you grind up your relatives and bottle the juice.
That's what I got out of it.
Sorry, we can't afford to retire.