The Budget Debate, Part 7: Demography, We are too old to pay higher taxes

In this post, I examine the role of demography in Minnesota's budget debate.  From U.S. Census Data, this table shows the state's median age from 1880 to 2010.

Census	Median Age
2010	37.4
2000	35.4
1990	32.4
1980	29.3
1970	26.8
1960	28.5
1950	30.6
1940	29.5
1930	27.2
1920	25.3
1910	23.7
1900	22.0
1890	21.7
1880	20.1

Back in the frontiers days of the 19th century, we were a young and growing state, with a median age of 20 years.  Over the decades, that number drifted upward to 30.6 years in 1950.  Then the baby boom pushed to number back down to 26.8 in 1970, a number not seen in Minnesota since the roaring 1920's.

So we can see that the "Minnesota Miracle" of 1971 occurred at an unusual time in the state's demographic history.  1970 was an inflection point, the fall in median age reversed with the baby bust and we are now (2010) the oldest society (37.4 years) ever to occupy this land. 

Back in 1971, you can see how the "Miracle" increase in taxes didn't look like such a bad proposition.  A young society had plenty of earning years remaining to overcome the drag of higher taxes, and still save enough for retirement.  The relatively young state needed more investment in its large school age population.  And the state's population was young enough to be around to enjoy the benefits of that investment.

Fast forward to 2011:  aging baby boomers are, in large part, driving the pressure for more spending on health care.  But our median age is now 11 years older than it was in 1970.  We are a middle-aged society and no longer have the luxury of time to earn enough to overcome the higher taxes the Governor proposes.

What looked good in 1971 as a policy alternative can't be sustained with 2011's demography.