--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The GS study says
> there will only be 2.3 workers for every person 65 and over in 
> 2050. If  people retire at 65, there will be a lot more people
> selling than buying  in 2050 as compared to now. 

I presume that you are referring to stocks.  

If you are looking at the stock market in isolation, the effect of 
what you describe should only change the nominal price level of 
stocks, not the actual price level.  This is what I referred to 
before when I noted that monetary policy can be used to counteract 
the shifts brough about by this demand shock.

Moreover, all that money being withdrawn from the stock market is now 
going to go towards consumption.  That effect, at least, is arguable 
beneficial for business, as it would produce a positive demand shock 
for their products.   

The real problem is if that generation (keeping in mind that this is 
a 20-year generation, retiring across a span of 10+ years each, so it 
is not a sudden effect) doesn't have enough money to withdraw from 
asset markets to fuel consumption, and that money has to come from 
somewhere else.  Well, o.k., we already know that they won't have 
enough - but how much *not enough* it is will have the biggest 
impact, since it will reduce the consumption (and ironically, the 
retirement savings) of the working generation at that time, in favor 
of boosting the consumption of the retired generation.

JDG

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to