Demographics and Interest Rates

The Bank of Canada apparently surprised many earlier this month with a second cut to interest rates this year to a historic low of 0.50%. Many appear to believe/hope/predict that rates are now abnormally low and will soon return to more normal levels. Not so fast.

Government fiscal mismanagement, global bank conspiracies, and money printing aside, one dynamic that doesn’t get talked about much in the current environment of supressed interest rates is the impact of demographics, or the statistical data relating to population and the particular groups (by age) within it. Most likely because it’s not anything you can blame any particular group for and is near impossible to sensationalize.

Young people are generally borrowers. Middle aged and old people are generally savers. Overall population growth and its fluctuations determine the relative number of (net) savers and borrowers in the population of a country. This relative number of savers and borrowers naturally has an impact on the market of loanable funds. Its economics 101: supply and demand.

People are living longer due to advances in medicine, science and healthcare. This is a good thing. However, one of the unintended consequences of such positive advances is those living longer (savers) find themselves on the wrong side of the supply/demand equation when it comes to interest rates, minimizing their return on savings. These victims of low return rates on savings are mostly products of the Baby Boom generation, born between 1946 to 1965.

There is some small hope on the horizon however as the number of Millennials (born between 1981 and 1997) will surpass the baby boom generation in size this year while the Gen-X population (born between 1966-1980) is expected to outnumber the Boomers by 2028. If there is anything to add some upward pressure on interest rates it lies with the Millennials and the hope that their appetites for borrowing and debt during their accumulating years of ‘stuff’ will be as insatiable as their Boomer parents and grandparents.

This entry was posted in Economics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

One Comment

  1. James
    Posted July 29, 2015 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    Lower birth rates will change the game soon enough. See link:

    http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/dec/10/why-arent-there-more-babies-us-fertility-rate-declines-economists-baffled

    An interesting set of lead indicators. Ditto “cause and effects”. I see a lot of empty houses and condos on the horizon…

    Still the young will forever borrow, and never save. Comsumerism rules. And the powers-that-be will make it possible for people to borrow, to “sustain the economy”. But margins will continue to thin, also thinning out those who can’t sustain business on thin margins. Mergers and acquisitions will increase. Small business will suffer. And so on. It’s not even “real” anymore. All a game.

    Can you imagine if people actually saved? Behaviours that can be taught and mastered. Would the global economy crash? Walk through any mall or Wal-Mart and honestly ask yourself how much of what’s on the shelves and racks is actually necessary to sustain the family unit. How much of it is needed to advance the cause of civilization? Maybe if people saved more we’d have fewer malls, fewer Wal-Marts, fewer slave-labour conditions in third and fourth world countries producing pop-culture products nobody really needs. Would this “advance” civilization? Perhaps. A realistic prospect for the future of humanity? Doubtful.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*