Population ageing is sometimes overwhelming, often misunderstood, and, more critically, its importance to our economy and livelihood is ignored.
Demography is the study of human populations and thus population ageing.
For all countries and regions (apart from one) economic growth is the mandate for all governments and economies. It is believed that economic growth increases standards of living. It is the term used to indicate the increase of per capita gross domestic product (GDP) and refers only to the quantity of goods and services produced.
Economics is the branch of social science that deals with the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services and their management through the analysis of the Factors of Production. The factors of production are the four resources which enable production; land, labour, capital and enterprise.
Focussing on the labour component, labour is a measure of the work done by human beings. Labour economics seeks to understand the functioning and dynamics of the market for labour. Such analysts are predominantly concerned with labour in terms of labour force participation and unemployment.
But, given that labour must be produced on a daily basis to achieve economic growth it should also be accepted that labour must be reproduced on an intergenerational basis.
This theory results in a concept known as Total Social Production. Total social production is where neither production nor reproduction can take place in the absence of the other. Therefore economic production and demographic reproduction are mutually interdependent.
Most economic analysts see demographic reproduction as secondary to economic activity. This ignorance has been a significant contributory factor as to why we are experiencing population ageing now. What has been missed by policy makers is the ability to ensure that production and reproduction can co-exist.
To manage the implications of population ageing into the future, the role of demography is paramount and can not be ignored any longer. It is time social policy and economic policy co-existed.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
I'm back
I’m back. My gorgeous little boy turned one last month and what a year it was. Now that he is healthy and happy, I thought it was time to reconnect with the world again. While I have managed to keep abreast of what has been happening in Tasmania economically, politically and socially, I have to admit being a full time mum has prevented me from digesting and analysing all the relevant information, policies and data sufficiently enough to provide you all with an insightful newsletter, InSummary.
Also last month, I presented to the Tasmanian Council of Professional Services a snap shot of population ageing, Tasmania and the implications for the labour market. During the time that Rory was sleeping, I beavered away; analysing data and policies, developing charts and working out ways to present the information which is sometimes overwhelming and often misunderstood in an informative, educational and challenging way. During this time, I had more energy, felt less tired, was engaged in the workforce again, was highly productive, was happier, and, more than likely, a better mother.
This scenario begged the question, if I could be both a good mum and highly productive in the workforce, why not consider a higher level of engagement in the labour market? Given I have no family in Hobart, I had to find formal care for Rory for the days that I would be working. Not only are most childcare services ‘full’, I discovered that we would not be entitled to any government concessions or rebates due to combined income assessments. In addition, we did not receive the Baby Bonus and are not entitled to any ongoing Family Tax Benefits. So, when I consider the cost of care and that almost half my income would go in taxes (from which I do not benefit), the next question is why would I, a highly educated, skilled, productive person, return to the workforce when there is no foreseeable financial gain? Any benefits would be purely self-fulfilling.
I know I am not alone.
With population ageing, shrinking workforces and skill shortages this is a ludicrous scenario.
Also last month, I presented to the Tasmanian Council of Professional Services a snap shot of population ageing, Tasmania and the implications for the labour market. During the time that Rory was sleeping, I beavered away; analysing data and policies, developing charts and working out ways to present the information which is sometimes overwhelming and often misunderstood in an informative, educational and challenging way. During this time, I had more energy, felt less tired, was engaged in the workforce again, was highly productive, was happier, and, more than likely, a better mother.
This scenario begged the question, if I could be both a good mum and highly productive in the workforce, why not consider a higher level of engagement in the labour market? Given I have no family in Hobart, I had to find formal care for Rory for the days that I would be working. Not only are most childcare services ‘full’, I discovered that we would not be entitled to any government concessions or rebates due to combined income assessments. In addition, we did not receive the Baby Bonus and are not entitled to any ongoing Family Tax Benefits. So, when I consider the cost of care and that almost half my income would go in taxes (from which I do not benefit), the next question is why would I, a highly educated, skilled, productive person, return to the workforce when there is no foreseeable financial gain? Any benefits would be purely self-fulfilling.
I know I am not alone.
With population ageing, shrinking workforces and skill shortages this is a ludicrous scenario.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
