This Planet Money episode explores the growing debate over delayed retirement among older workers. Economist Samuel Moyne advocates for reinstating mandatory retirement in high-paying roles to allow younger workers to advance, while economist Olivia Mitchell counters that the economy benefits from experienced older workers staying longer. The episode examines the fairness, economics, and potential policy solutions, including phased retirement.
Summarized by Podsumo
The number of Americans over 65 in the workforce has nearly doubled since the mid-1980s, reaching 11 million.
Economist Samuel Moyne argues that mandatory retirement (for those who can afford it) could free up high-salary positions for younger workers, especially in academia.
Economist Olivia Mitchell pushes back, citing the lump-of-labor fallacy and pointing out that more older workers can actually benefit the economy and younger generations.
Despite differences, both experts agree that phased retirement—shifting to part-time or advisory roles—could be a win-win.
Surprisingly, mandatory retirement still exists for air traffic controllers (age 56) and commercial pilots (age 65), but was largely eliminated for most U.S. workers in 1986.
"If the older people don't retire, there won't be any opportunities for the young... And the reality is that more people working create more jobs and create more demand for labor."
— Olivia Mitchell
"This staying on is unfair to younger people who often have to choose different careers or wait around for a cent in their career."
— Samuel Moyne
"Younger scientists are more likely to instigate disruption in their fields, replacing established ideas with new ones. While older scientists tend to iterate on their earlier work."
— Peer-reviewed study cited in the episode