Visual source: Newseum
Edward Glaeser welcomes you to the new old age, the one in which working till you drop is the norm.
The number of Americans over 65 in the labor force increased from 10.8 percent in 1985 to 12.1 percent in 1995 to 15.1 percent in 2005 to 17.4 percent in 2010. Until 2001, most workers age 65 and older had part-time jobs; since 2001, full-time work has been far more common.
Consider the difference between today’s extended work life and the average American work life during the mid-20th century in the midst of what was, in retrospect, a retirement boom. Again, the numbers present a vivid picture: from the ’40s to the ’80s, the percentage of men who were 65 and older in the labor force fell precipitously — from 47 percent in 1949 to 15.6 percent in 1993. By the 1980s, retirement at age 65 was nearly universal for American workers. Today, however, 36.5 percent of 65- to 69-year-old men are still part of America’s labor force.
Glaeser paints much of this as a change in the type of job—apparently we all love our work so much we don't want to leave. He also goes out of his way to define a theoretical non-retiring baby boomer as someone who made bad fiscal decisions, investing in dot.com bubbles and frittering away loads of cash. He gives a tsk-tsk, then waxes lyrical on just what a boon all these experienced oldsters are to society. To which I say: shove it. 1) Just because I'm not juggling flaming chainsaws for a living doesn't mean I don't have something better to do with my time than give it to someone else, 2) many of us had zero choice in watching our pensions turn to "investment opportunities" turn to dust, and 3) while you might be happy to have someone with 30 years experience polishing your teeth, older workers being unable to retire is a far bigger problem than benefit. Think this only affects would be retirees? Think again. Young workers are not just competing against their cohorts, but increasingly against older workers who cannot afford to surrender their spot at the grindstone. Creating a pool of unemployment at the start of the economic ladder is only planting the seeds for a generation even less able to retire.
Of course, Glaeser does't see that as a problem.
The United States has always had a Calvinist backbone. We’ve long been comfortable with shorter vacations and longer workweeks. In this light, the mid-20th century retirement boom seems like something of an aberration. In a sense, the current rise in the working elderly is a reversion to form, and perhaps that’s not such a bad thing. While some older workers will have to work because they can’t afford not to, there remains the sunny possibility that others, like Galbraith himself — who worked well into his 90s — will do so because they find fulfillment in their jobs.
Really, shove it is too mild. What I really want to say should not be said this early on a Sunday morning. Sorry, but that is the biggest bunch of horse manure I've seen in the NYT in ages. The fiscal equivalent of advising people to "lay back and take it."
Nicholas Kristof says that those who are trying to put out the Occupy Movement are only fanning the flames.
You have to wonder: Could Mayor Michael Bloomberg and police chiefs around the country be secretly backing the Occupy Wall Street movement?
...
Occupy Wall Street isn’t about real estate, and its signal achievement was not assembling shivering sleepers in a park.
The high ground that the protesters seized is not an archipelago of parks in America, but the national agenda. The movement has planted economic inequality on the nation’s consciousness, and it will be difficult for any mayor or police force to dislodge it.
In pushing Occupy to the next stage, actions against protestors may be driving up the energy, but I suspect that those getting beaten or pepper-sprayed could do without friends like these.
Yunte Haung looks at the truth behind the smiles of "southern hospitality."
I’m waxing nostalgic because I miss the time when the sweet Southern air was, at least for this immigrant, not poisoned by fear, the malevolent phobia that haunts Dixie today. The new law is as much an ineffective solution to economic woes as a xenophobic reaction by an already bifurcated community to the arrival of new immigrants, be they Asians or Hispanics. As Charlie Chan might have asked, “What in the name of Confucius happened to Southern hospitality?”
Fear of immigrants is the new fear of blacks—though don't think for a second that the old fear of blacks has gone away. It's just that fear of immigrants had to be added to the mix, because it takes really high levels of fear these days to keep people from realizing what's really causing their problems.
David Mambrick and Elizabeth Meinz deliver the sad news that all the practice in the world won't make up for a lack of talent, and that exceptional ability may be just that.
How do people acquire high levels of skill in science, business, music, the arts and sports? This has long been a topic of intense debate in psychology. Research in recent decades has shown that a big part of the answer is simply practice — and a lot of it.
...
But this isn’t quite the story that science tells. Research has shown that intellectual ability matters for success in many fields — and not just up to a point.
Think of this as a good news / bad news thing. If you've been sweating bullets to overthrow Einstein or wondering why 10,000 hours with the violin hasn't made you the next Itzhak Perlman, odds are against you. On the other hand, think of everything you've heroically accomplished against all odds!
Alexandra Horowitz notes that the intelligence of dogs is often compared to that of a toddler. Is it a fair comparison?
One evening when he had just turned 2, [Child] proclaimed “half moon up!” at the half moon rising in the dusk sky. By their second birthdays children may have vocabularies of hundreds of words. Impressed? Recently Chaser, a border collie, was trained to retrieve, nose or paw 1,022 objects by name. Still, Chaser, like all dogs, utters nary a word. [Child], like many 2-year-olds, speaks a blue streak. It might be that [Dog] has told me about the half moon; I just don’t understand his dialect.
A nifty little article with some nice comparisons and speculation. This morning I spent some time playing with a mixed-breed puppy up for adoption. I'm still in mourning for my sweet old Golden who died a couple of years ago at age 17, but I'm starting to think it's time for a new pup in the house.
Thomas Friedman notices that students have parents as well as teachers.
Monitoring homework; making sure children get to school; rewarding their efforts and talking up the idea of going to college. These parent actions are linked to better attendance, grades, test scores, and preparation for college,” Barth wrote. “The study found that getting parents involved with their children’s learning at home is a more powerful driver of achievement than parents attending P.T.A. and school board meetings, volunteering in classrooms, participating in fund-raising, and showing up at back-to-school nights.”
Yes, I actually mentioned Friedman in APR. Unlike George Will, I haven't sworn a vow not to read Friedman. It's just that I usually don't think he's said anything worth repeating.
And speaking of George Will...
Patrick Pexton, pundit-excuser extraordinare, looks at what may be the most ridiculous issue ever tackled by a supposed ombudsman, namely: was George Will swayed to write pieces that were pro-GOP.
Will, a longtime friend of Nancy Reagan, got flak in 1980 for not disclosing until later that he helped Ronald Reagan with debate preparation. And although a consistent free-trader, Will was zinged in 1995 for his defense of free trade in automobiles without disclosing at the time that Maseng Will’s [George's wife] company was lobbying for Japanese car manufacturers.
Way too long story made short: Will's wife has been working for Bachmann. Will said nice things about Bachmann. Will's wife started working for Perry. Will said nice things about Perry. The conclusion: Will and his wife have a perfect track record in supporting losers and loons.
Kathleen Parker frets over the "Palinization" of the GOP.
It takes courage to swim against the tide of know-nothingness that has become de rigueur among the anti-elite, anti-intellectual Republican base. Call it the Palinization of the GOP, in which the least informed earns the loudest applause. The latest to this spectacle is Herman Cain, who has figured out how to turn his liabilities into assets. After fumbling for an answer during an editorial board meeting to a simple question about his position on Libya, a lead news item since February, Cain blamed — who else? — the media.
You know, Kathleen, when you've spent years greasing the slide, it seems harsh to complain when people hit the bottom.
This morning's columns are making me grumpy. Time to go look for that puppy.