Focusing on the final section, “Ham and Eggs in the Twenty-first Century,” this paper [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-4580.2000.00112.x/pdf] emphasizes the impending question of the consequences related to the retirement of the baby-boomers. As there is a growing gap in population numbers between the elderly and the young, there is uncertainty surrounding social security and retirement benefits. How will the United States government finance social security pensions for the high nuumber retirees associated with the baby-boomers? Will the younger generations be forced to retire in their late sixties in order to finance the burden, or does the US need to restructure the entire social security system? [The “normal” retirement age is now 66, and will continue to rise under current legislation…the prof]
This paper claims that “there are three possibilities for national income enhancement: more technological progress, more capital, or more labor.” While “it would be nice if there were a simple solution to the baby boom retirement,” the mounting concern surrounding this issue is evident throughout US news, especially in today’s presidential race. A conflict arises for candidates who are forced to emphasize the need for social security reform while attempting to maintain the trust among the large elderly constituency. How can the candidates propose a social security reform that will address the baby-boomer question as well as the issue of national debt, whilst winning the vote of the elderly?