I wonder what the impact would be for younger workers if older workers are not moving on and vacating spots, etc., like holding on to jobs. Is that a positive or a negative or not really an issue at all? If you could take that on first, Theresa? Yeah, I will. I think Mark and I will agree that in general,

having more workers to an economy is a good thing. We're not going to disagree, but there are some occupations where older people do reach their peak before they're 67. They reach their peak in their 50s. Hanging onto their jobs actually does block job opportunities for people who are more productive and really need the work. I'm thinking about my profession as a professor. We have these English professors. I quoted one in an article I wrote in one of my books who said, I should be retiring from Yale. I'm in my 70s, but I want to work a few more years to get a little extra money. In the meantime, he's graduating three or four PhDs in English who actually one of them came to try to get a PhD, another PhD at the new school. There are occupations where older people are hanging onto their jobs and are not leaving room for advancement. I think productivity in the economics profession will benefit

from Theresa working more years past the normal retirement age, not less. The truth is we can look at isolated areas where productivity may go up or down. Older workers tend to be much more productive in some things because they have the experience behind them, less productive in others because they're not always as adaptable to new technologies and because of physical differences. But overall, this is something I think called the lump of labor fallacy. The idea, for example, we brought in a bunch of immigrants that there wouldn't be enough jobs for Americans. I don't think that's true in general. It may be true in a specific moment in time if it happens too quickly or if there's a big disruption in the economy. But we actually see in this economy is our labor force has slowed so dramatically that having seniors work a few months longer, a month longer every two or three years, all that would do is slow the growth of slowing in our labor force. I think that's something we could easily handle

and the economy would benefit from it.