The Aging of America and the
Transition to Sustainability
| Recently, there has been a lot of attention paid to the growing number of elderly retirees in the next century and projected short falls in Social Security funding. Focusing only on the Social Security dilemma without looking at the many other benefits that accompany the aging of America's population is to risk missing our nation's first real opportunity to begin the transition to a smaller more sustainable population. |
Why our population is aging. The growing number of elderly in the next century is the natural result of two factors: a baby boom and bust cycle and the increasing life expectancy of Americans. The rapid population growth of the post-World War II "baby boom" created a huge generation ö some 95 million strong ö which will be entering old age in the first part of the next century. As the baby boomers (particularly women) went to college and entered the work force in the 1970s, they had fewer babies. This baby "bust" contrasted sharply with the high fertility of the previous two decades and created an uneven age structure where one generation (the boomers) had significantly more members than the generations that preceded and followed it. This, combined with the fact that Americans are living substantially longer (a trend which is expected to continue well into the 21st century), has resulted in a growing number of elderly ö both in terms of absolute numbers and as a percentage of the total population.
| The population dynamics of age structure. Age structure is a term used by demographers to describe the number of people in various age groups (usually divided in five year intervals, i.e. 1-5, 6-10, etc). Demographers also refer to the "dependency" age groups ö the young and old ö in contrast to those ages where people would normally be active in the workforce (18-64). |
Population of the United States, by Age and Sex, 1950-2050 (millions) Information source: International Data Base, U.S. Census Bureau Graphic source: Ed Stephan |
A population with an even-age structure is one where every age group is more or less equally represented except for the older age-groups (particularly the extremely old, 80+) which gradually decrease in size. Likewise, a population's age structure becomes unbalanced when certain age groups are of a disproportionate size. Of particular importance to social-policy makers is the number of women in their child-bearing years (15-44) and the ratio of those in the dependency ages versus those in the active-working years.
Population growth, momentum and decline. National population growth is the product of just four factors: births, deaths, in and out migration. Even though the total fertility rate in the U.S. has been below replacement level (the average 2.1 births per woman necessary to "replace" the mother and father) since the early 1970s, our population has continued to grow. One reason is population momentum, the large number of women in the baby boom generation simply had more babies (even though they averaged less than two) than the deaths of those from earlier (and smaller) generations. The other reason is high immigration; far more people are coming into the country than leaving. Were it not for immigration, U.S. population growth would be ending by the middle of the next century as the aging boomers gradually reached their life expectancy and deaths began to out number births.
The aging of America as a demographic crossroads. Although Americans are living longer than ever, death remains the natural outcome of the aging process. Because of population momentum from past growth, the aging of America in the next century represents the first real opportunity for the U.S. to see the number of births drop below deaths. The result would be a U.S. population that stops growing and begins a transition to a smaller, more sustainable optimum population ö unless, of course, immigration continues at present levels (net migration accounts for about 1 million people added to the U.S. population each year). Since U.S. fertility has been near replacement level for some 25 years, the U.S. could begin a gradual decline in its population around the middle of the next century if immigration were reduced to a sustainable level of perhaps 100,000 per year.
High immigration, the road to unending population growth. Immigration, both direct and indirect (through births to the foreign born), now contributes to over 60 percent of U.S. annual growth, a figure which is expected to increase if present trends continue. Births to foreign-born women account for over one-third of U.S. net natural increase (births minus deaths) even though the foreign born represent 10 percent of the overall population. The relatively higher fertility of immigrants as well as the rapid growth in total numbers have significantly contributed to the rising fertility of the overall U.S. population. Unless immigration is substantially reduced, the U.S. population will continue to grow with no end in sight ÷ despite the opportunity for stopping growth presented by an aging population in the next century.
The benefits of stopping population growth. Stopping U.S. population growth in the next century would have widespread benefits, not just for the Social Security system, but more importantly for the environment and quality of life of every American. Genuine, long-term sustainability can never be achieved as long as our population continues to grow. Even the best efforts to manage, mitigate, or accommodate growth are eventually negated by the constant addition of ever more Americans. For our overcrowded schools, increasingly congested highways, imperiled biodiversity and threatened environment, stopping growth and beginning the transition to a smaller population would be crucial step forward.
Choosing the road to sustainability. The cost of maintaining Social Security is small when compared to the costs inherent in the population growth quick fix. There are many viable solutions to the Social Security dilemma that do not involve high immigration and more growth. It is crucial to take advantage of the coming opportunity to move toward a smaller and more sustainable population ÷ a fundamental prerequisite for the long-term solvency of Social Security. The larger our population the more difficult the inevitable transition will be. And, the longer we wait the worse off we will be from a resource, environmental and quality of life perspective. In trying to save Social Security, let's not be penny wise and pound foolish by sacrificing our nation's first real opportunity to begin the transition toward sustainability by turning to the short-term, quick fix of population growth.
Home | What's New | What is NPG? | Publications | Population Facts and Figures
Advertising Campaigns | Media Coverage | Members Only | Links | Population-News Listserve