Survey of ‘about to be retired’ persons, President Clinton’s Speech Last Evening

Today’s Detailed Commentaries North America >> Canada: Survey of ‘about to be retired’ persons In a survey of Canadians now between 50 – 60 years old, said to have an statistical error rate of not more than +/- 3.5%:

• on average 53% said they planned to work following retirement; and,
• almost 50% said they had retirement savings of under $100,000.

The referenced article that discusses the survey simply reports the survey results, without further commenting or suggesting what the survey results imply.

---

My comments:

• there has to be a direct correlation between persons seeking jobs that otherwise would be retired, whether full time or part time, and youth unemployment;
• countries, and Canada is no exception to this have to employ their youth going forward, or suffer negative consequences;
• countries, and again Canada is no exception, are unlikely going to be able to create enough jobs to employ both people that ought to be retired and their youth;
• that is going to lead to youth unemployment, unless:
• governments preclude employment for retired seniors – a possibility, but an unlikely one since no government is going to want seniors who are wards of the state, or, heaven forbid, lose their votes;
• governments incentivize employers to employ people that wouldn’t otherwise be employed – a slippery slope indeed;
• real economic growth results in an abundant number of jobs for both seniors who want jobs and youth – an unlikely event in current and prospective economic times.

The bottom line:

• many retirees who would like to find work to supplement their savings are going to fail in that, and will see their lifestyles decline in their retirement years. This will make them less happy than they otherwise would be;
• some of those who should be retired will take jobs that ought to be available to young people;
• youth unemployment will be higher than it otherwise ought to be; and,
• there will be a greater chance of societal disruption than there ought to be.

Topical Reference: Most fiftysomethings plan to work in retirement to offset low savings, from The Globe and Mail, August 21, 2012 – reading time 3 minutes. North America >> United States: President Clinton’s Speech Last Evening Simply put, from my perspective it is now incumbent on Messrs. Romney and Ryan (and of course their ‘team’) to incontrovertibly refute what former President Clinton last evening said were errors in the Romney campaign slogans and messaging. If they are unable or unwilling to do that it seems to me the Romney/Ryan ticket is in far greater difficulty this morning than it was yesterday morning. I assume there will be more than one debate between Messrs. Obama and Romney (and perhaps between Messrs. Biden and Ryan) before the November 6 election day. For me, the U.S. Presidential election race is getting more interesting by the day – and in many respects getting more important by the day as well. This is not intended as a ‘taking sides’ statement, but rather my neutral observation based on listening to President Clinton last evening. If you haven’t as yet heard enough of what President Clinton said last evening you can read one reporter’s summary of some of it in the referenced article. Topical Reference: Bill Clinton’s Just Gave This Convention Speech, And It Drove Democraats Into A Total Frenzy, from Business Insider, Grace Wyler, September 5, 2012 – reading time 4 minutes. North America >> United States: The Republicans are asking a good question Commentary: It is widely being reported in all media that the Republicans are asking Americans ‘whether they are better off’ economically from the time President Obama took office until now. That is a good question, it is how the question is properly interpreted and who the question is asked of where problems arise. Here is how I think the question ought to be thought of, and addressed – by Republicans and Democrats alike: First, what does ‘better off’ mean. Many people might think the question being asked is as simple as if you had $3 in your pocket and no debt at the end of 2008 do you now have more than $3 in your pocket and no debt today. By that interpretation of the question:

• as a generality, bankers, executives and the wealthy 1% of Americans may well be ‘better off’ today than they were at the end of 2008;
• the average Main Street American may or may not be able to answer that they are better off – depending how they have marshaled their energy and resources in that past four years – but many are likely on a straight arithmetic calculation of personal wealth and job well-being to answer the question, interpreted purely by economic quantum difference, negatively.

Second, ‘better off’ might ‘better mean’: are you better off in 2012 than you were at the end of 2008 had the Obama Administration not put the economic programs in place than they did? This is a more complex question with a far more subjective answer. I am not about to venture alternate answers to the question so interpreted – but believe that to be the right interpretation of the question. It is easy to be a critic. I am again reminded that the actor Richard Burton is said to have responded, when being told the critics had panned one of his performances, ‘critics are much like eunuchs at orgies’. In the U.S. political arena where cross-party criticisms are rampant, in current over-levered times arena I think it is, and will be, a ‘horse of a completely different colour’ to sit in the Oval Office than it is to criticize whoever currently is sitting there – irrespective of their political party. Should Messrs. Romney and Ryan find themselves in deep conversation in the Oval Office on January 20, they may find themselves sitting with ‘glazed over eyes’ saying to each other as the reality of weight of that office becomes ever more clear to them: “well, we got what we wished for, now what do we do?” Many see the question being asked by the Republicans as a ‘simple one’. I don’t. For example, see The threat of $600bn of fiscal tightening may decide the US election, from The Telegraph, Damian Reece, September 4, 2012 – reading time 3 minutes, which article begins with the words “It’s a simple question, posed last week by Mitt Romney”. For a different perception than mine of the ‘right answer’ to the Republican question see Better Off Today? Let’s Count the Ways We’re Not, from Real Clear Markets, September 5, 2012 – reading time 3 minutes.