SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (3076)3/10/2004 7:41:30 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7936
 
What you want to look for is the life expectancy of folks who had reached 50 in each of those years.



To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (3076)3/10/2004 7:46:03 PM
From: Original Mad Dog  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7936
 
That's not the issue. It's how the age of death is distributed that matters. If a slew of people die before one and everyone else lives til 70, and then the infant mortality rate plunges and everybody still lives til 70, the "average" life span might increase from 55 to 70 but the impact on SS would be minimal since the infants who died never paid in or got money out.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News