Social Security Again Again???

[donheff]

A couple of weeks ago as the population was passing 300,000,000 I heard someone on the radio say that in 2043, given current projections, the population would be 400,000,000. That's a healthy chunk of folks, most working. I think population increases combined with wage increases gives SS a better chance too.

So do most economists which is one of the reasons most of them believe in a robust immigration program. Please don't read that comment as endorsing a robust illegal immigration program.

 

[greg]

I see. So much for getting to know each other better. I owe it all to government. Thank you for setting me straight, Greg.

If you reread what I said, you'll see that I didn't say "We owe it all to gov't." You're twisting what I said into something I didn't say. So much for getting to know each other better. You're welcome, Charles.

 

[greg]

So do most economists which is one of the reasons most of them believe in a robust immigration program. Please don't read that comment as endorsing a robust illegal immigration program.

I agree with you donheff. I think it would be a serious mistake to make immigration policy based on some extra SS benefit that would accrue to retired folks. A policy should be developed that takes into consideration the best interests of the whole nation, not some special interest group. That said, maybe now "The more, the merrier." It's now time to start considering all the facts and how we'll shape our futures.

 

[Cut-Throat]

So do most economists which is one of the reasons most of them believe in a robust immigration program. Please don't read that comment as endorsing a robust illegal immigration program.

Not only that, with the slow population growth in developed nations, a program that I was watching said that these same nations would be 'competing' for immigrants. Our whole economic system is based on growth, without a growing population you end up like Japan in the 90's.

 

[bpp]

Not only that, with the slow population growth in developed nations, a program that I was watching said that these same nations would be 'competing' for immigrants. Our whole economic system is based on growth, without a growing population you end up like Japan in the 90's.

Japan in the 90's was due to a deflating bubble, not population dynamics. Japan in the 2000's is doing better, with lower (actually I think negative by now) population growth. William Bernstein once noted that stock markets seem to do better in countries with higher per capita GDP, so one might imagine that increased per capita productivity might be more important than population growth.

Or not. Just a thought.

 

[Cut-Throat]

Japan in the 90's was due to a deflating bubble, not population dynamics.

The deflating bubble was due in part to the population dynamics. Prices exceeded demand. Demand was reduced due to a population not increasing as fast!

 

[donheff]

Japan in the 90's was due to a deflating bubble, not population dynamics. Japan in the 2000's is doing better, with lower (actually I think negative by now) population growth. William Bernstein once noted that stock markets seem to do better in countries with higher per capita GDP, so one might imagine that increased per capita productivity might be more important than population growth.

Or not. Just a thought.

Well, there is a reassuring thought. I will support a sensible immigration program (i.e. one that continues to encourage a substantial input of new-comers) since the economists tell me that will be good for the nation's economy long term. But if the stop-em now voices win the day, maybe I can look forward to an OK market anyway

 

[youbet]

Population growth has its pros and cons as it relates to the economy. But eventually, there could be a point where there is too much population for terra firma to sustain any additional growth, say two or three more doublings. I wonder what we do then? How will our children grandchildren great grandchildren cope when there just aren't resources for any additional population growth?

Since we won't be hear to worry about it, do we just leave it to future generations to figure out?

 

[Patrick]

Population growth has its pros and cons as it relates to the economy. But eventually, there could be a point where there is too much population for terra firma to sustain any additional growth, say two or three more doublings. I wonder what we do then? How will our children grandchildren great grandchildren cope when there just aren't resources for any additional population growth?

Since we won't be hear to worry about it, do we just leave it to future generations to figure out?

Have just enough offspring to replace those who die. Otherwise some people will starve.

 

[donheff]

How will our children grandchildren great grandchildren cope when there just aren't resources for any additional population growth?

Since we won't be hear to worry about it, do we just leave it to future generations to figure out?

Stephen Hawking says we have 1000 years to get off the planet. Tell your reps to fund NASA. :

 

[Craig]

1,000 years, eh? Let me just tap that into FireCalc, and see how we're gonna make out here ...