- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Messages
- 28,122
- Reaction score
- 14,232
- Location
- Boca
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
He claimed that many baby boomers were delaying retirement. How can this possibly be shown to be incorrect based on a claim that half of the decline in overall participation rate can be attributable to age? That's just nonsense. What you've posted tells us nothing about whether or not baby boomers are delaying retirement.
You have something against reading?
Because older individuals participate in the labor force at lower rates than younger workers, the aging of the population exerts downward pressure on the overall labor force participation rate. While older workers today are participating in the labor force at higher rates than older workers of previous generations, there is still a very large drop-off in participation when workers enter their early 60s.
The fact that participation rates conditional on age were declining for many groups in the run-up to 2008, including for prime-age men from the 1950s and for prime-age women from the late 1990s, may also have contributed to the decline in participation. This would have been expected to result in a decline in the participation rate above and beyond the pure aging effect even in the absence of a recession. Note, these effects were partly offset by other pre-existing trends, like a rise in the participation rate for older workers.
You have no excuse for your ignorance.