Thats the old fashioned plan: have lots of kids to fund your retirement. Today, we are investing in AI, automation, and robots, which is similar if you think about. We don’t need a population increase if robots are doing the work instead. China is a good example of making these investments aggressively right now to deal with their demographic cliff.

▲

WillAdams 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's a nice idea, and if such devices aren't used to further concentrate wealth for their owners, that would work --- the problem is, LLMs and the robotics which they facilitate look to be the first major technological advance where the enlarging of the economy which they afford does not bring about a commensurate increase in the number of jobs.

▲

seanmcdirmid 2 days ago | parent [-]

There is theory and then there is practice of course. But at least if you are invested in the market as part of your retirement, you are technically an owner of some small share of it.

▲

WillAdams 2 days ago | parent [-]

Which brings us full-circle --- what percentage of the population participating in 401-K or similar investment structures _and_ cashing out at retirement age will the economy support?

Apparently almost half of workers are not participating in such: https://pensionrights.org/resource/how-many-american-workers...

	▲	seanmcdirmid a day ago \| parent [-]
		You are probably going to be OK if you are invested. If you aren't invested (no i money to invest or you save money under your mattress for poor returns), then I really don't know. It is definitely going to be a problem, maybe we will have figured out a social safety net by then (speaking as an American, and speaking in a very cynical tone).