Professor Froomkin’s comment about morbidity rates reminds
me that I promised to explain why on earth I was looking into the statistics on
life expectancy. The reason is the bearing
of those statistics on the debate over immigration. One of the most important statistics
concerning a country’s economy is the proportion of the population that is
economically productive. In the standard
life cycle model, the population is divided into those too young to enter the
labor force, those who are retired from the labor force, and those who actually
produce the goods and provide the services that we all need to survive. When Social Security was instituted, only a
small fraction of the adult population could be expected to live more than a
few years beyond a retirement age of 65.
With the improvements in child mortality and early adult health, even
the increasing numbers of retirees could be supported adequately by the labor
of those in the productive years intermediate between childhood and old
age. [I am simplifying all of this to
keep down the length of this post.] But
as those who make it out of childhood live longer and longer, the balance
shifts.
Look at it this way.
If you are in your thirties or early forties, then most of the men and
women who will, when you are seventy, grow your food, truck it to your local
supermarket, care for you when you are sick, and amuse you when you are not
have not yet been born. If there are too
many oldsters like you, say in 2055, and too few young ‘uns, then regardless of
how much you put into your 401k, you are going to be in trouble.
What is the most natural solution? Let in a whole bunch of immigrants who are
either children or else of childbearing age, and make sure they get enough to
eat, good health care, and good educations.
That way, when you are a senior citizen like me, you won’t starve to
death or die for lack of a doctor to look after you.
In short, a steady flow of immigrants is in the rational
self-interest of those already here.
Without immigration, the situation is only going to get worse, as it has
for example in Japan.
1 comment:
Complications ensue if you attempt to (as you should) factor in increases in productivity. If fewer workers can produce the same amount of goods.... Of course, if increases in productivity are siphoned off by capitalists (which, after all, is part of their job description) then not so good. Of course, recapturing that by removing the cap on income subject to SS tax and increasing SS payments would help.
Post a Comment