Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Atlas shrugged

[Gar Lipow <lipowg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Also there is one other point. In the U.S, anyway the increase in the
ratio of seniors to others is projected to occur alongside a drop in the
ratio of children to population -- so that the total "dependency" ratio
is projected to be a only a tiny bit higher than at present...

Michael Perelman wrote:
>
> You are correct.
>
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 08:15:05PM -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
> > I wrote:
> > > > and what's wrong with an aging population? I don't think biology is
> > > destiny.
> >
> > Michael Perelman:
> > >The problem is that it means a high dependency ratio; just as is found in
> > >a very
> > >young population.
> >
> > the dependency ratio doesn't automatically rise with the age of the
> > population. It's partly a socially-determined variable.
> >
> > Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
> >
>
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx