When super is not so super

Lessons From Everyday Life By Theodore Lewis

Bridgman, MI--The word “supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” was coined in the 1930s and popularized by the 1964 film “Mary Poppins,” which my wife Sharon and I recently watched on Movie Night. After the movie, I couldn't get that super-serpentine word out of my mind. I kept singing it to myself for days: Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious!

“Super” means "extraordinarily good" or something that's great or extraordinary.

Most times, I use the word “super” when talking about the Super Bowl, supersizing my McDonald’s meal, or describing my sister’s super Thanksgiving meals.

Last week, I read about the United Nations tracking countries categorized as “super-aged.” The U.N.’s use of the word “super” in labeling super-aged countries has nothing to do with being great, just extraordinary. Based on the U.N.’s definition, a super-aged country has at least 20 percent of its population aged 65 and older.

South Korea recently made the U.N.’s list of super-aged countries. Of smaller well-known countries, Monaco tops the list with about 36 percent of its population aged 65 and older. Japan is the most super-aged of large countries, with more than 28 percent of its population aged 65 and older.

Super-aged countries do not consider this heavily aged trait to be anything close to being great. In Japan, the aging of the population has become a super problem, which resulted from significant declines in the birth rate for decades.  

With the exception of a small baby boom in the 1970s, Japan’s birth rate has been declining since 1950, reaching a new low of 5.8 births per thousand people. Now, there are more than two deaths for every birth in the country.

"Birth rate" is defined as the number of births per 1,000 estimated population. "Fertility rate" means the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44. “Total fertility rate" refers to the average number of children a woman would have during childbearing years. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Worldwide, demographers use the term "replacement level fertility" to describe the average number of children a woman must have during her childbearing years to maintain a stable population without immigration. A replacement level fertility rate of 2.1 births expected per woman's lifetime is considered necessary to sustain a population without immigration.

Having a total fertility rate of less than 2.1 over time would lead to a much more aged population. Japan's total fertility rate, which has been falling, dipped to 1.20 in 2023.

A Japanese professor at Tohoku University has projected a demographic decline within a "conceptual clock" that assumes a continuing trend line of falling birth rates. Based on his calculation, Japan would have just one child on Jan. 5, 2720— 695 years from now. Facetious? Yes!  However, the professor drives a point that highlights the problem.

How about life in the United States?

The "65 and older" group accounts for 16.8 percent of the U.S. population. Right now, only five states are listed as super-aged: Delaware, Florida, Maine, Vermont and West Virginia.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s projection, the total U.S. population will hit super-aged status by 2030—just five years from now—due to our dramatically falling birth rates.

In 2007, the U.S. birth rate was 14.3 (per 1,000 population) and the total fertility rate was 2.12, just above the replacement level fertility rate of 2.1 needed to keep our population stable without immigration. Since 2007, however, U.S. birth rates have fallen significantly and are now just under 11 per 1,000 population. As a result, our total fertility rate was 1.67 in 2022 and is even lower now.

In Guam, my old stomping grounds, birth rates are super—in a good way. The U.S. territory’s birth rate during the 2020 census was 17.4, higher than that of Utah, the state with the highest birth rate of 14.1.

Why should we worry?

When I was growing up in Holly, MI in 1960, the U.S. birth rate was 23.7 and we had a strong labor force. Now, the birth rate in the U.S. is less than half of that, and we are headed toward becoming super-aged.

Low birth rates negatively affect labor supply and aggravate demand over time. In a super-aged society, age-related costs increase while the tax base decreases. We need an adequate supply of new and younger workers to meet the labor needs of the manufacturing and service industries, which generate jobs that a strong economy requires.

There are only two things that can keep the U.S. from becoming super-aged: an increased birth rate and/or an increase in legal immigration quotas.

Even though the thought of becoming super-aged may sound quite atrocious, I'm going to keep singing “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.”

Theodore Lewis is the former CEO of Guam Memorial Hospital and has a healthcare consulting business in Bridgman, MI. He is collecting stories about lessons learned in life and can be reached at theodorelewis@yahoo.com.

Subscribe to

our digital

monthly edition