Another One Bites The Dust

Just in case you're as Math-Challenged as I am, here's the deal on the "conservative" meme about how American life-expectancy was so much shorter way back when Social Security was first put in place.

If we look at life expectancy statistics from the 1930s we might come to the conclusion that the Social Security program was designed in such a way that people would work for many years paying in taxes, but would not live long enough to collect benefits. Life expectancy at birth in 1930 was indeed only 58 for men and 62 for women, and the retirement age was 65. But life expectancy at birth in the early decades of the 20th century was low due mainly to high infant mortality, and someone who died as a child would never have worked and paid into Social Security. A more appropriate measure is probably life expectancy after attainment of adulthood.

As Table 1 shows, the majority of Americans who made it to adulthood could expect to live to 65, and those who did live to 65 could look forward to collecting benefits for many years into the future. So we can observe that for men, for example, almost 54% of the them could expect to live to age 65 if they survived to age 21, and men who attained age 65 could expect to collect Social Security benefits for almost 13 years (and the numbers are even higher for women).

"Average" can be kinda tricky.  I try to remember that if I put Warren Buffett in line at the local soup kitchen, the 'average' net worth goes up to about $100 million, but I've still got 50 homeless guys plus Warren Buffett.  Tricky.

hat tip = Paul Krugman