+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii (/showthread.php?tid=23609)
Pages:
1
2
"Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - Durian Fiend - 04-03-2025
Speaking of a worker shortage, I found this article interesting. Apparently Puna's demographics are slightly better than the state overall, but not by much. Google says median age for our district is 39.9 while it's 40.6 in the state as a whole. 1 in 4 residents statewide will be over 65 by 2035.
Aging Into A Deficit
"When someone consumes more than they produce, it’s called a lifecycle deficit.
The report’s findings, while perhaps unsurprising, are stark: By the time they reach 80, people consume $52,000 a year more than they bring in. That’s compared to people at 48, who the report said earn $35,000 more than they consume, which is a lifecycle surplus.
Consumption by the elderly means the use of things like health care and federal benefits such as Medicare and Social Security, as well as of private assets such as housing and pensions."
https://www.civilbeat.org/2025/03/super-aged-pose-major-challenges-hawaii/
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - Punatang - 04-03-2025
It is interesting Fiend and it's touted by some to be a worldwide phenomenon. There are only a few places on earth, according to some, where the birthrate currently is high enough to replace the population. I have not been able to count all of the people myself so I can't vouch for those theories. I read the other day someone's belief that the world population had been under counted to the tune of many billions. Obviously if the population count is less than static, you will have a net aging of the population followed ultimately by extinction.
Here in Hawaii, the lack of replacement might be turbocharged by a shift in demographics. It does seem like a good number of younger families are moving to the mainland and older mainlanders are moving here. I'm sure one could find statistics that support that and perhaps even statistics that challenge that idea.
Japan stands out as a place where the population is aging. You can basically get a house for free there now if you are willing to assume responsibility for it's repair and upkeep.
Things are changing very quickly now. AI and robotics seem poised to assume many of the duties that humans now perform. Theoretically these marvels of technology will produce much and consume very little tipping the balance once again. We certainly live in interesting times.
Thanks for sharing the article.
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - MyManao - 04-03-2025
Consumption by the elderly..
Sounds like a negative spin on something that has no negativity. We all grow old.. each and everyone of us. And, for the most part, it's the only time in life one can actually focus on something other than their place in the grand machine of productivity.
For the fortunate.. the ones that get to old age with a few bucks in their pocket.. it's the only time they can live without the pressure of life's demands.. so why begrudge them that?
Talking about an elderly person as a financial deficit is bullshit. Excuse my French.
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 04-03-2025
Consumption by the elderly means the use of things like health care and federal benefits such as Medicare and Social Security, as well as of private assets such as housing and pensions."
Social Security & Medicare was paid for throughout a person’s working life. Supposedly invested in a safe government account. If a bank invested in an interest bearing account or real estate, would they be considered a drain on the economy, or a titan of industry?
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - Punatang - 04-03-2025
(04-03-2025, 07:28 PM)HereOnThePrimalEdge Wrote: Consumption by the elderly means the use of things like health care and federal benefits such as Medicare and Social Security, as well as of private assets such as housing and pensions."
Social Security & Medicare was paid for throughout a person’s working life. Supposedly invested in a safe government account. If a bank invested in an interest bearing account or real estate, would they be considered a drain on the economy, or a titan of industry?
Supposedly invested in a safe government account.
This is mostly a myth although partially true. Funds paid into SS are immediately used to pay current beneficiaries. The partially true part is that if there is a surplus, those funds are invested into US Treasury securities. As long as each generation creates more workers to support it than it's surviving members require, all is well. If your generation of Americans decided that it did not want so many children, a smaller pool of children now have to support a larger number of longer living kupuna. Pyramids are only sustainable as long as the base is growing. Social security more closely resembles a pyramid scheme than some "safe government account" that Uncle Sam has "invested". The "supposedly" part is right though.
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - Durian Fiend - 04-03-2025
(04-03-2025, 07:20 PM)MyManao Wrote: Consumption by the elderly..There's no spin or moral judgement inherent in this article, it's just an unfortunate and unprecedented matter of demographic fact. No begrudging necessary! However, I know one old fellow who has felt guilty about his consumption of services for several years and plans to off himself fairly soon for this reason.
Sounds like a negative spin on something that has no negativity. We all grow old.. each and everyone of us. And, for the most part, it's the only time in life one can actually focus on something other than their place in the grand machine of productivity.
For the fortunate.. the ones that get to old age with a few bucks in their pocket.. it's the only time they can live without the pressure of life's demands.. so why begrudge them that?
Talking about an elderly person as a financial deficit is bullshit. Excuse my French.
[quote pid="354650" dateline="1743709640"]
(04-03-2025, 07:28 PM)HereOnThePrimalEdge Wrote: Consumption by the elderly means the use of things like health care and federal benefits such as Medicare and Social Security, as well as of private assets such as housing and pensions."
Social Security & Medicare was paid for throughout a person’s working life. Supposedly invested in a safe government account. If a bank invested in an interest bearing account or real estate, would they be considered a drain on the economy, or a titan of industry?
Supposedly invested in a safe government account.
This is mostly a myth although partially true. Funds paid into SS are immediately used to pay current beneficiaries. The partially true part is that if there is a surplus, those funds are invested into US Treasury securities. As long as each generation creates more workers to support it than it's surviving members require, all is well. If your generation of Americans decided that it did not want so many children, a smaller pool of children now have to support a larger number of longer living kupuna. Pyramids are only sustainable as long as the base is growing. Social security more closely resembles a pyramid scheme than some "safe government account" that Uncle Sam has "invested". The "supposedly" part is right though.
[/quote]
Robert Reich, a former SS trustee himself, claims that 40 years ago they did foresee this demographic shift with so many baby boomers retiring. What they didn't foresee is that much more income would escape social security taxation due to a greater concentration of wealth at the top.
What seems left out of his presentation is whether or not they foresaw the dramatic birth rate decline over the past 40 years, and if that's relevant to the discussion. Seems to me that it would be. For Hawaii and the country as a whole, we've seen about a 50% decline in the birthrate since 1980. Anyway, Reich's short video is here for those inclined: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfZuB7XSFys
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - HereOnThePrimalEdge - 04-03-2025
What seems left out of his presentation is whether or not they foresaw the dramatic birth rate decline
We spend far more money on the military than on social security. No one sees a war coming (a comparison to not seeing a drop in the birth rate). But yet we spend money on a war. What happens afterward? We generally raise taxes to pay for it. No one calls that a Ponzi scheme.
We could raise the tax rate to pay for social security. A fund which people have actually paid into in advance, so they get THEIR OWN MONEY BACK after they retire.
The military doesn't turn a profit. Much of what is built never gets used. Maybe it's the military with billion dollar cost overruns that's the Ponzi scheme?
The reason talking heads pick on social security is because they can't make a profit off retired people. They make big bucks from their investments in the military industrial complex. So they won't bite the hand that feeds them.
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - Durian Fiend - 04-03-2025
(04-03-2025, 10:41 PM)HereOnThePrimalEdge Wrote: What seems left out of his presentation is whether or not they foresaw the dramatic birth rate decline
We spend far more money on the military than on social security. No one sees a war coming (a comparison to not seeing a drop in the birth rate). But yet we spend money on a war. What happens afterward? We generally raise taxes to pay for it. No one calls that a Ponzi scheme.
We could raise the tax rate to pay for social security. A fund which people have actually paid into in advance, so they get THEIR OWN MONEY BACK after they retire.
The military doesn't turn a profit. Much of what is built never gets used. Maybe it's the military with billion dollar cost overruns that's the Ponzi scheme?
The reason talking heads pick on social security is because they can't make a profit off retired people. They make big bucks from their investments in the military industrial complex. So they won't bite the hand that feeds them.
Excellent points. I actually don't think the birthrate is super important because the US population growth rate has been fairly steady since 1980, if not growing a tiny bit. Of course, population added via immigration, whether it's at a state or national level, will create a different (and somewhat older) demographic than a steady birthrate would.
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - Punatang - 04-04-2025
(04-03-2025, 10:41 PM)HereOnThePrimalEdge Wrote: What seems left out of his presentation is whether or not they foresaw the dramatic birth rate decline
We spend far more money on the military than on social security. No one sees a war coming (a comparison to not seeing a drop in the birth rate). But yet we spend money on a war. What happens afterward? We generally raise taxes to pay for it. No one calls that a Ponzi scheme.
We could raise the tax rate to pay for social security. A fund which people have actually paid into in advance, so they get THEIR OWN MONEY BACK after they retire.
The military doesn't turn a profit. Much of what is built never gets used. Maybe it's the military with billion dollar cost overruns that's the Ponzi scheme?
The reason talking heads pick on social security is because they can't make a profit off retired people. They make big bucks from their investments in the military industrial complex. So they won't bite the hand that feeds them.
Not to bicker but I don't think anyone said "Ponzi scheme". You had a whole thread about the greed and deception of those making money off of old people so I think you are somewhat aware that everyone from HMSA to Sketchers is getting in on "The Silver Tsunami" which is the largest demographic shift in US history. There is lots of money to be made and lots of people getting in on that. I'm not picking on social security or any security net. I think they are necessary and there will always be a tug and pull and abuses from both the greedy on one end and the lazy on the other. Humans are messy that way. My point was just that you do not get "your own money back". That is not what social security is in it's current form. It's a pyramid scheme. You get my money. That's why people pick on it.
RE: "Super-Aged" population a challenge for Hawaii - leilanidude - 04-04-2025
What they didn't foresee is that much more income would escape social security taxation due to a greater concentration of wealth at the top.
--------------
The cap on income that is taxed goes up every year and the max monthly benefit is linked to the amount of that cap. More people earning at or near that annual cap is a plus for the program, overall.
In 2025, the maximum amount of earnings subject to Social Security tax is $176,100, meaning the maximum Social Security tax an employee and employer EACH will pay is $10,918.20 - that is $22,000!