Les Premiers Baby-Boomers Québécois font-ils une Meilleure Préparation Financière à la Retraite que leurs Parents? Revenu, Patrimoine, Protection en Matière de Pensions et Facteurs Démographiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the forthcoming decades, population aging will generate major challenges in our society. In particular, the financial security of future pensioners constitutes an important issue. This paper will examine the financial planning for retirement of the Quebec first cohorts of baby boomers born in 1946-1955, who will retire in the forthcoming years, by comparing with their parents their situation toward their income, their patrimony and their pension coverage throughout their life cycle. The demographic factors that may interact on the financial suitability in retirement will also be studied. The cohort analysis constitutes an essential approach. The datasets used come from surveys that were taken between 1971 and 2001. Contrary to some popular thoughts, the results reveal that the first cohorts of baby boomers are in a better situation regarding their financial planning for retirement than their parents at the same age. This outcome is valid as well for the condition of their income, their accumulated patrimony or their pension coverage. However, this patent advantage is not applicable to all the first boomers. If current patterns persist, some of them could be exposed to a high risk of financial insecurity after retirement. Moreover, the demographic characteristics of the first boomers, as their extended life expectancy, their smaller families and their propensity to live alone, could contribute to reduce their economic advantage compared to their parents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".