Connect with us

Published

on

The geezers are coming! The geezers are coming! 

Demographic doomsayers warn slowing birth rates and graying populations will wreak economic havoc and torpedo stocks.

Yet the dire scenarios of zombie-like boomer hoards leeching off their working progeny have it backwards: Aging populations are always, everywhere signs of progress not threats to it.

Yes America, like most developed nations, is aging. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates 9.8% of US residents were 65 or older in 1970. At the start of 2023, it was 17.3%.

In 2000, there were 20.9 folks aged 65 and older for every 100 working age counterparts (What is called the OADR or Old Age Dependency Ratio). Now there are 30.4, and the OECD projects it will top 40 by 2050.

The trend will continue to be a major theme this century, with the Census Bureau projecting Americas agedness will peak about 2080. What to do? Invest in adult diapers? 

No. Celebrate.

Every major economy ages as it prospers.

Living standards increase and lifespans follow. Birth rates fall alongside infant mortality. American males born in 1900 on average lived to 46 and females to 48. Now, its 73 for males, 79 for females.

Tremendous advances in healthcare have given us extra fruitful and productive yearsin the US, Europe, everywhere.

Mick Jagger turned 80 before the Stones play MetLife Stadium this May. AARP sponsors that tour not a joke! But boomers aplenty will splurge big-time for tickets.

Want good demographics instead? Careful what you ask for. Nations with low agedness (hence low OADRs) near-consistently suffer poverty, short lifespans, high infant mortality, wretched economies, markets, ecologies, and lifestyles.

Still, demographics arent destiny. Innovation is. History shows agedness doesnt impede growth or stocks. In 1982, Americas OADR was 20. Weve since thrived, not dived. GDP tripled. The S&P 500 returned 11.8% annualized since then.

Yes, periodic recessions and bear markets strucklike always, everywhere. But growth continued and stocks climbed.

Doomers envision oldsters as penny-pinching parasites. Growth killers! Wrong. In 1984, Americans 75 and older spent just half what those 25 to 34 did. By 2023, that leapt to nearly 80%. Again, innovation-derived prosperity rules. Longer lifespans and increased retirement ages mean oldsters earnand spendmore. Yes, the 75-plus crowd only spends 59% of what 45 to 54 do (Americas highest spending bracket). But thats well above 1984s 39%.

We geezers invest, funding capitalisms growthy magic. We give to descendants who spend. Many of us work into our 80s. (Im 73no retirement in sight.) Like legendary financier Bernard Baruch once famously said: To me old age is always 15 years older than I am. 

Age isnt the detriment it was when Baruch was born in 1870. There are now fewer physically demanding and risky agricultural and factory jobs, and more services and information-related work.

Accumulated experience and technology can make oldsters increasingly productive, not less so. (Yes, I know President Biden cant string coherent sentences together consistently and dementia hits many all part of the stats).

Demo-doomsters also erroneously extrapolate recent trends. Who really knows if developed world birthrates keep falling? Or how immigration shifts skilled workers around? Or what efficiencies new innovations bring?

Stocks? They price factors impacting firms profitability three to 30-ish months out. Not further. Demographic trends evolve glacially over decades, giving markets eons to adapt.

So let the demo-doomers keep talking. They are only bricking up the wall of worry driving this bull market higher.

Ken Fisher is the founder and executive chairman of Fisher Investments, a four-time New York Times bestselling author, and regular columnist in 21 countries globally.

Continue Reading

Politics

South Korean court clears Wemade ex-CEO in Wemix manipulation case

Published

on

By

South Korean court clears Wemade ex-CEO in Wemix manipulation case

South Korean court clears Wemade ex-CEO in Wemix manipulation case

After nearly a year of legal proceedings, a South Korean court acquitted former Wemade CEO Jang Hyun-guk of market manipulation charges.

Continue Reading

Politics

Is there £15bn of wiggle room in Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules?

Published

on

By

Is there £15bn of wiggle room in Rachel Reeves's fiscal rules?

Are Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules quite as iron clad as she insists?

How tough is her armour really? And is there actually scope for some change, some loosening to avoid big tax hikes in the autumn?

We’ve had a bit of clarity early this morning – and that’s a question we discuss on the Politics at Sam and Anne’s podcast today.

Politics Live: Reeves to reform financial regulations

And tens of billions of pounds of borrowing depends on the answer – which still feels intriguingly opaque.

You might think you know what the fiscal rules are. And you might think you know they’re not negotiable.

For instance, the main fiscal rule says that from 2029-30, the government’s day-to-day spending needs to be in surplus – i.e. rely on taxation alone, not borrowing.

And Rachel Reeves has been clear – that’s not going to change, and there’s no disputing this.

But when the government announced its fiscal rules in October, it actually published a 19-page document – a “charter” – alongside this.

And this contains all sorts of notes and caveats. And it’s slightly unclear which are subject to the “iron clad” promise – and which aren’t.

There’s one part of that document coming into focus – with sources telling me that it could get changed.

And it’s this – a little-known buffer built into the rules.

It’s outlined in paragraph 3.6 on page four of the Charter for Budget Responsibility.

This says that from spring 2027, if the OBR forecasts that she still actually has a deficit of up to 0.5% of GDP in three years, she will still be judged to be within the rules.

In other words, if in spring 2027 she’s judged to have missed her fiscal rules by perhaps as much as £15bn, that’s fine.

Rachel Reeves during a visit to Cosy Ltd.
Pic: PA
Image:
A change could save the chancellor some headaches. Pic: PA

Now there’s a caveat – this exemption only applies, providing at the following budget the chancellor reduces that deficit back to zero.

But still, it’s potentially helpful wiggle room.

This help – this buffer – for Reeves doesn’t apply today, or for the next couple of years – it only kicks in from the spring of 2027.

But I’m being told by a source that some of this might change and the ability to use this wiggle room could be brought forward to this year. Could she give herself a get out of jail card?

The chancellor could gamble that few people would notice this technical change, and it might avoid politically catastrophic tax hikes – but only if the markets accept it will mean higher borrowing than planned.

But the question is – has Rachel Reeves ruled this out by saying her fiscal rules are iron clad or not?

Or to put it another way… is the whole of the 19-page Charter for Budget Responsibility “iron clad” and untouchable, or just the rules themselves?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?

And what counts as “rules” and are therefore untouchable, and what could fall outside and could still be changed?

I’ve been pressing the Treasury for a statement.

And this morning, they issued one.

A spokesman said: “The fiscal rules as set out in the Charter for Budget Responsibility are iron clad, and non-negotiable, as are the definition of the rules set out in the document itself.”

So that sounds clear – but what is a definition of the rule? Does it include this 0.5% of GDP buffer zone?

Read more:
Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn
Tough decisions ahead for chancellor

The Treasury does concede that not everything in the charter is untouchable – including the role and remit of the OBR, and the requirements for it to publish a specific list of fiscal metrics.

But does that include that key bit? Which bits can Reeves still tinker with?

I’m still unsure that change has been ruled out.

Continue Reading

Politics

LA sheriff deputies admit to helping crypto ‘Godfather’ extort victims

Published

on

By

LA sheriff deputies admit to helping crypto ‘Godfather’ extort victims

LA sheriff deputies admit to helping crypto ‘Godfather’ extort victims

The Justice Department says two LA Sheriff deputies admitted to helping extort victims, including for a local crypto mogul, while working their private security side hustles.

Continue Reading

Trending