A Macro-Economic Indicator of Age at Retirement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper explores the relationship between the Wealth Transfer Index (WTI), a statistic defined by Brown and Bilodeau (1997), and retirement age, which is the age at which the workers in an economy cease to be economically productive. Appropriately expressed as a ratio of consumption demand to labor productivity, WTI is a barometer for the demand for wealth placed on the workers of an economy. This paper explains why a relationship between this statistic and retirement age must exist. Using Canadian historical median retirement age data compiled by Statistics Canada and calculated values of the WTI for the same period, three linear regression models are fitted. The conclusion from these models indicates that there is a strong positive correlation between the WTI and average retirement age. This paper also briefly looks at the well-documented demographic shift expected to occur in Canada because of the baby boom–baby bust tidal wave. The aged dependency ratio is expected to increase dramatically, reaching 45% in 2036. A practical application of the WTI model suggests that the baby boom cohort may experience a rise in the normal retirement age in the period 2017–34. They will, in effect, be forced to retire at ages that will allow for an “acceptable” transfer of wealth from the workers to dependent Canadians. Using one of the fitted linear regression models, and projected values of the WTI, the paper concludes by projecting the median retirement age to 2041 for Canadian workers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".