>>But, over the long term, it’s better to have a growing work force, not one that’s shrinking compared with the number of retirees.<<
Why is this true? It seems to be taken as granted that this is true. I don't think that having a growing workforce that is barely earning a living is such a good thing.
It just seems unsustainable to think that we can depend on a growing workforce indefinitely to support the growing number of retirees. Long term it will be better to figure out technological solutions to this problem, i.e. robotics.
Hopefully with a reduced workforce we can focus more on quality of life.
Edit: I guess the reason this quote bothers me so much is that increasing the population in a lot of countries would mean bringing new babies to a life of poverty and misery. Why not focus on fixing the quality of life thing first?
Edit2: This is a response to the comment:
>>A lot of people would be surprised to learn that the impoverished peoples in a many those countries are a lot happier we expect. All-in-all they aren't much less happy than we are.<<
I think you may be right. I was probably just projecting. Still, being below the poverty line brings a lot of problems. Tens of millions of people die just from hunger every year or from diseases that are simple to cure or prevent in the developed world. That is probably the kind of misery I'm talking about.
Why is this true? It seems to be taken as granted that this is true. I don't think that having a growing workforce that is barely earning a living is such a good thing.
It just seems unsustainable to think that we can depend on a growing workforce indefinitely to support the growing number of retirees. Long term it will be better to figure out technological solutions to this problem, i.e. robotics.
Hopefully with a reduced workforce we can focus more on quality of life.
Edit: I guess the reason this quote bothers me so much is that increasing the population in a lot of countries would mean bringing new babies to a life of poverty and misery. Why not focus on fixing the quality of life thing first?
Edit2: This is a response to the comment:
>>A lot of people would be surprised to learn that the impoverished peoples in a many those countries are a lot happier we expect. All-in-all they aren't much less happy than we are.<<
I think you may be right. I was probably just projecting. Still, being below the poverty line brings a lot of problems. Tens of millions of people die just from hunger every year or from diseases that are simple to cure or prevent in the developed world. That is probably the kind of misery I'm talking about.