[skeeter]

So maybe all the little future taxpayers we need to support a giant geezer population down the road will materialize yet. But I wouldn’t count on it.

Here's an idea - don't retire.

Of course I believe the widespread bias against aged employees will need reforming.

[Gay State Conservative]

I'll wager that it hasn't plunged for the 47%

[Cowboy Bob]

If it weren’t for illegals and welfare queens, the rate would have been even lower. :(

Working Americans should be proud that they are subsidizing their own demise.

[Standing Wolf]

How high is the murdered baby count now? Hmmm!

[Psalm 144]

Leftist policies are always a blight to the human race.

[Viennacon]

I notice that most of these countries with “aging populations” have pretty liberal abortion policies. The same liberals then try to import people from incompatible cultures because we “need” them to support the aging population. These same people then sponge on benefits and our country collapses and is balkanized.

[Colofornian]

From the article: The youngest baby boomers will begin turning 50 next year, a noteworthy milestone in the graying of America. But the more important data point may be this: Last year, the birth rate in America fell to the lowest level in recorded history. These may be separate developments but they are part of the same ominous story. As our largest generation moves toward full-on retirement we are minting what promises to be our smallest generation, a group that from the very beginning of its working years will face the impossible task of supporting millions of entitled old fogeys.

C'mon all consider the source here. Liberal of liberals, Time Mag.

Let's analyze their premise for a moment.

The birth rate, already not high, dropped to its lowest levels ever in 2011.

That means that if the culture roughly remains the same, the best-earning 2011 babies will begin their post-college career say in 2034. In 2034, whatever Baby Boomers are still alive will range in age from the 70s up to age 88.

At that point, if you considered that perhaps 94% of all in the workforce then would range in age from 23 to 65, translated that means that 23 yo in the Year 2034 will be about 2% of the overall workforce.

Obviously, even if they had normal birth #s, they wouldn't be expected to produce 2% of the "contribution" to "social security" or whatever by then has replaced it.

The issue isn't yet significant until you get almost double-digit years or more of such birth decline...when huge drops in laborers in their 30s results in extremely significant issues. And even then most of the Baby Boomers will be in the grave by the 2040s.

The results THEN will be not less laborers...just more Hispanic & Muslim immigrants flooding the U.S. as labor "replacements"...(like what Europe has had to do with their extremely low birth rates...bring in more Muslim immigrants)...

Besides, a country that endorses Planned Parenthood carving away at the birth rates by carving away at pre-born flesh basically deserves whatever it gets.