With the apocalyptic economic panic going around the media, I figure it’s time to be a contrarian. Admittedly, we have huge structural economic problems (far larger than the average establishment source will admit) that go back at least to the 1970s if not earlier. I will discuss my view of these in a later post. But for now, think about this: The oldest baby boomers are now 63. In 2 years, they will be 65.
Now, I’m sure you’re all thinking that I’ve gone nuts. It’s true that this means higher Social Security and Medicare costs, perhaps a later retirement age eventually, the Grateful Dead being used to sell calcium supplements, hordes of pseudo-hip oldsters swarming down the streets in golf carts, etc…. But just as importantly, think about what it means for the job market. Even if the labor market is stagnant, millions of old folks retiring means millions of job opportunities, just 2 years away.
Truman once said that he wanted to find a one-armed economist to advise him, so that the answer to every question could no longer be “on the one hand this, but on the other hand that”. I think I’m starting to understand where the whole vagueness thing comes from.
November 12, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Vagueness? On one hand the retiring baby boomers should open up jobs, but on the other hand there will be a skills mismatch, but on the third hand tehcnological change will make the skills mismatch less problematic, but on the fourth hand globalization may destroy the type of jobs retirees held faster than retirees create jobs, but on the fifth hand…
See – I am an economist.
November 13, 2008 at 4:16 am
Is globalization or automation the main “job vacuum”? More on this at a later date…
November 24, 2008 at 1:58 am
More terrifying is the prospect of pseudo-hip oldsters (like some of your readers) clogging the tennis courts or swarming the streets on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUuwEq98ByM