Another ER against uping retirement age

[ERhoosier]

At least I found it worth a read-

Why Raising The Retirement Age Is A Bad Idea - Seeking Alpha

 

[bUU]

It all comes down to what's just versus what's profitable.

 

[Huston55]

First time I've read one of his articles.

Unfortunately, he took a good subject and mangled it with rambling drivel, poor grammar, and misspelled words. Buried near the end of the article is his point, I guess, that earlier retirement age removes older people from the work force to make jobs available for younger ones. The occasionally amusing sarcasm is predictable and doesn't make up for the sloppy thought process and poor writing. I'm surprised he gets paid for this.

Good thing he has a "Sugar Momma."

 

[travelover]

.......... Buried near the end of the article is his point, ........

Thanks, I bailed before I got there.

 

[jollystomper]

First time I've read one of his articles.

Unfortunately, he took a good subject and mangled it with rambling drivel, poor grammar, and misspelled words...

Thanks - for second I thought it was just me. I had to read it several times as as a lot of what he wrote did not seem to a relationship to the subject matter. I wonder if he gets paid by the word.

 

[Chuckanut]

Take your choice. Marauding gangs of unemployed and disaffected youth or hobbling throngs of terminated geezers eating away at the fabric of American society, all clawing for the few jobs left in the United States.

I can see it now. Groups of over aging citizens walking about the city, panhandling, shoplifting goods, drinking beer and tossing the bottles onto the street, and causing fearful teenagers to walk on the other side of the road.

And that's just the women.

 

[Independent]

Buried near the end of the article is his point, I guess, that earlier retirement age removes older people from the work force to make jobs available for younger ones.

Yes, I had to be patient to find it, too. He believes in the "lump of jobs" idea* - there's a fixed number of jobs regardless of how many people want to work.

That's one of these short term vs. long term concepts. In the short term, there are specific employers looking to hire specific numbers of workers. Sure seems like a fixed number of jobs.

But, in the long run, we've always found that more workers leads to more people applying for jobs, leads to employers finding profits at the margin by growing businesses, leads to more wages, leads to more demand for goods, leads to ....

Unless it really is "different this time", over the long run the number of jobs will grow to match the number of workers.


*more commonly called "the lump of labor fallacy"

 

[bUU]

I think the problem with that is that within any reasonable time horizon the "long run" almost surely won't happen, because our domestic labor pool of roughly 150 million is going to be continually put to the back of the queue by the injection into the global labor pool of that many new workers per year, as more and more of what we do is found to be do-able somewhere else, as those somewhere elses develop skills and capabilities that they don't have currently. At that rate, it would be a full generation before the reaction you're referring to begins to occur.

 

[ERD50]

I can see it now. Groups of over aging citizens walking about the city, panhandling, shoplifting goods, drinking beer and tossing the bottles onto the street, and causing fearful teenagers to walk on the other side of the road.

And that's just the women.

Like this?


Monty Python - Hell's Grannies - YouTube

start at 42 seconds if the embedding didn't work

-ERD50

 

[Arifriekinel]

But, in the long run, we've always found that more workers leads to more people applying for jobs, leads to employers finding profits at the margin by growing businesses, leads to more wages, leads to more demand for goods, leads to ....

Unless it really is "different this time", over the long run the number of jobs will grow to match the number of workers.


*more commonly called "the lump of labor fallacy"

It's at least a bit different this time, with better AI already replacing most of the jobs people used to do as teenagers, and with the globalized, instant communication with anyone anywhere moving office jobs to somewhere where it's acceptable to pay <$2 an hour. Fast food jobs could easily become a thing of the past with increased customers.

Even McDonalds has gotten rid of tons of cashier jobs in the EU by replacing them with touch screens. Assembly line-style food robots are available, but there aren't enough customers to justify the cost just yet. Add in enough more customers, it'll cost more to hire more employees, but not for the bots we'd need, which could provide must faster and efficient service.

So this time might not be the tipping point, but there certainly is one. The point where there is such high demand that it becomes cheaper to automate the process. There are only so many people we can hire before it's cheaper to replace them with the kinds of bots that were only dreams in the past.

I won't pretend I have any idea what the guy in the article is talking about though

 

[pb4uski]

Thanks, I bailed before I got there.

+1 his writing reminded me of someone who talks because they like the sound of their own voice.

 

[ERhoosier]

Like this?


Monty Python - Hell's Grannies - YouTube

start at 42 seconds if the embedding didn't work

-ERD50

ROTFLMAO

I was thinking of the same sketch!

 

[Chuckanut]

Like this?


Monty Python - Hell's Grannies - YouTube

start at 42 seconds if the embedding didn't work

-ERD50

Great!

 

[jollystomper]

Like this?


Monty Python - Hell's Grannies - YouTube

start at 42 seconds if the embedding didn't work

-ERD50

I can deal with the Grannies. But hordes of rampaging "Keep Left" signs...