New Zealand Aging
New Zealand’s Prime Minister Helen Clark believes she has the solution to that country’s problem of an aging population with little money saved to provide for twilight years: Force them to save through KiwiSaver, an automatic-deductible savings plan. The KiwiSaver plan initiates a mutual fund savings account to which New Zealanders would contribute and which would be accessible only after retirement.
As people live longer and have smaller families, New Zealand’s dependency ratio (the number of retired people supported by the working age population) is expected to rise to 45% in 2050, up from 18% in 2005. Both the USA and the UK have the same problem with an aging population, and their dependency ratio is expected to be around 50% in 2050.
Unfortunately, New Zealanders, like so many in the USA as well, spend more than they save during their working years. As of March 2005, household spending exceeded disposable income by 13.8% in New Zealand, compared to 0.2% in the U.S.A. A major government concern for most developed countries is this lack of savings and excessive spending habits which will overburden social services in the future.
New Zealand maintains a generous welfare system. Retirees at age 65 are guaranteed 65% of the national average wage, with everyone receiving the same amount regardless of wealth. This has caused a lack of individuals saving for retirement, creating a “the government will take of us” attitude.
The KiwiSaver is a step in the right direction, but many doubt it will greatly improve the situation. Many question whether there is a single solution to the future pension problems facing not only New Zealand, but all the developed nations of the world with graying populations and few young people to carry the load.
Editor’s Note: New Zealand’s pension fund is in dire straits. Too bad there was no mention of the obvious solution: Incentives to raise the birthrate.
See the Source: Shamubeel Eaqub, “New Zealand’s Pension Problem,” The Wall Street Journal — Asia, 5 April 2006.
Problems with the Pill
More evidence of the destructive nature of birth control pills has been discovered.
— The author of Cancer-Gate: How to Win the Losing Cancer War, Dr. Sam Epstein, reported on CBC’s “Marketplace” that use of the hormones estrogen and progestin, two major components in birth control pills, increases the risk of breast cancer. Dr. Epstein is a professor of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago; he is considered to be a leader in cancer causes and prevention. Dr. Epstein went so far as to warn that use of the birth control pill is “the largest unregulated human trial that’s ever been conducted.”
— Wendy Mesley, “Marketplace” host and a breast cancer survivor, reported that the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer re-classified hormonal contraceptives as carcinogenic.
— Breast cancer: Its link to abortion and the birth control pill (One More Soul, publisher) author, Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, M.D., studied and analyzed massive amounts of scientific and other sources over a six-year period to show that a woman who takes birth control pills before her first child is born has about a 40% increased risk of developing breast cancer and a woman who has taken the pill for four or more years prior to the birth of her first child has a 72% increased risk factor in developing breast cancer.
— A study of 103,000 Norwegian and Swedish women between the ages of 30 and 49 uncovered that the women who took birth control pills had a 26% higher risk of developing breast cancer than those who never used the pill. Women who had used the pill for long periods of time increased their risk of breast cancer by 58%; women using the pill over 45 years of age had an increased risk of 144%.
— The British Medical Journal reported that pill use increases women’s risk of developing cerebrovascular disease by 1.9 times while increasing the tendency to develop cervical cancer by 2.5 times. A 25-year follow-up study of 46,000 British women noted that this increased risk lasted for ten years after women have stopped using birth control pills.
See the Source: Terry Vanderheyden, “The Pill: the largest unregulated human trial that’s ever been conducted,” LifeSiteNews.com, 7 March 2006, www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/mar/06030705.html
No Room for Contraception
No Room for Contraception, a campaign initiated in New York presenting the negative aspects of contraception, was recently introduced to the public. Birth control has become a political issue with the publicity surrounding emergency contraception sales and use; the campaign hopes to inform the public and decrease society’s dependence on contraceptives.
“For decades, very few people of reproductive age were aware of negative side aspects of birth control,” said Ruben Obregon, co-founder of the campaign. “The campaign will highlight the negative effects of contraception, including emergency contraception.”
Obregon continued, “Pharmacies should not be forced to fill prescriptions for so-called emergency contraception, especially since these drugs potentially prevent the implantation of a newly created human being. Companies like Wal-Mart need to think twice before caving into the pressure of the abortion rights movement to stock these drugs.”
“More and more women are coming forward with stories of regret for the use of artificial contraception and surgical sterilization, stating that it had negative effects on their marriage,” said Mary Worthington, campaign co-founder. “No Room for Contraception is dedicated to exposing these stories along with the growing amount of scientific and sociological research showing contraception’s adverse side effects.”
For more information, see: www.noroomforcontraception.com.
See the Source: “Website Exposes Dangers of Contraception to Marriage and Society,” 27 February 2006, www.earnedmedia.org/nffc0227.htm
