Simplified Revision to the original post (still intact - below):
First of all, the "Baby Boom" years, as noted by Wikipedia, are from 1946 to 1964; with the first of those "babies" starting to retire in 2011. Now, in order to have 10,000 retirees per day, it means that an average of 3.65 million babies (10,000 times 365 days) would have had to have been born during those "boom" years and, more importantly, all would have had to lived long enough to retire.
Now if we look at the birth tables for those years ( Table 1.1 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/statab/t941x01.pdf ), we would see that starting in 1946, 3.4 million babies were born; rising to a high of 4.3 million in 1960 before falling off. So, if you do the math, that means that an average of 3.9 million births per year or, roughly, 10,900 births per day. Of course, this is higher than the estimated 10,000 retiree number and it should be. Actually, that number should be a lot higher in order for 10,000 a day to be retiring. That's because the life expectancy of someone born in those years was a lot lower than it is today. In fact, if you were born in 1946, you had an average life expectancy of only 66 years.
Anyone familiar with actuarial life tables know that, for every age group, in every year, a certain percentage of each specific age group will die each year. Today, those tables tell us that only about 69% of those living today, and under the age of retirement, will actually live to retire at 65 (Insurance companies use life tables to calculate lifespans and insurance rates and payouts). Or, in other words, 31% will die before retirement. But, back in the late 1940's and 1950's and 1960's, the death rates were much higher (examples of the top 5 causes of death in the years 1900 to 2005: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922292.html). In fact, those born in those "boom" years had about a 38% chance of dying by the time they were old enough to retire. Therefore, only about 6,800 are actually retiring today; and, this is well below the claimed 10,000 (a very politically motivated number).
Of course, the media and many liberal politicians and pundits are using that 10,000 a day number to try and explain away the reason for the decline in the labor participation rate in each month's lousy unemployment reporting. Of course this is bunk because there are more people who should be entering the workforce than those retiring. Starting in 1993, the more than 4 million babies that were born that year became theoretically eligible to enter the workforce at age 18. However, again based on life tables, only about 3.6 million will live. Some 1% or 400,000 will not make it to age 18. Even so, the difference between those boomers who might be retiring and those 18-yearolds who might be entering the workforce is a net increase 3,100 workers per day or 1.13 million workers per year. In fact, our workforce during the Obama years has only increased from 154 million to just over 155 million. By rights, in a normal economy, the workforce, based on the net increases, should be well over 160 million by now.
On Friday, after it was reported that 368,000 workers had left the workforce in August, it was inevitable that some Obama defenders would cite the fact that the high number of those leaving the workforce was due to the baby boomers reaching retirement age. In fact, earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office had claimed that at least a third of all of those who have stopped looking for work are retiring baby boomers. Then, too, there's the claim that 10,000 baby boomers will retire every day for the next 19 years. But, is all this true?
To me, the numbers don't support all these wild claims.
First off, let's look at the 10,000 boomers-a-day claim. By all accounts, the baby boom followed the end of World War II and lasted 14 years. If you look at Census data since 1900 you will find that, at the beginning of 1947, the population had jumped by 2,737,500 from a growth of only 1,460,401 in the previous year. Clearly this meant that 1946 was the first year of the baby boom. Now, depending on who's doing the counting, somewhere between 1960 and 1964 is considered the end of the boom period when population growth slipped back closer to 1%. We'll use Wikipedia's pronouncement that 1960 is the end of the boom. Now, during that 14 year period, the population grew by 39,282,592 people. By simply dividing that number by 14 years, you come up with a average growth per year of 2,805,899. Divide that number by 365 and you get 7,687 and that's the number of baby boomers who would retire each day. Not 10,000. But, then too, this is a gross number. Based on statistical accounting, only 85.6% of women and 77.4% of men, born in the U.S., will have actually lived to retire by age 65. Therefore, that 7,687 should actually be somewhere near 6,200 retiring every day. So, the 10,000 number is a flat exaggeration. Always be leery of big numbers that are so nicely rounded to the thousands.
The other claim is that a third of all those who have stopped looking for work are actually due to baby boom retirements. Well, to make that claim, it assumes that the baby boom retirements exceed the number of those entering the workforce by 33%. Therefore, the number of those entering the work force should only be one-third less than 6,200 leaving the workforce; or, about 4,100 workers. Now, theoretically, those entering the workforce would be somewhere between 15 and 24 years of age. For expediency, lets just assume they're all 20 year-olds. If you go back to the population tables, you would find that the population grew by 2,867,115 in 1992; and, by 2012 they would be ready to work. That means that, on a daily basis, about 7,855 workers would be entering the workforce against 6200 leaving. Proving that, even with the baby boomers retiring, there should be a net increase of more than 1,600 workers entering the workforce each day.
But it doesn't just stop there. Each year, the U.S. allows 700,000 "legal" immigrants to enter the country with more than half (due to families of two or more) of them already having secured jobs upon entry as a requirement for their immigration. That means that another 1000 people per day will enter the workforce. So really, the growth in the workforce on a daily number is about 2,600 or about a million new workers per year. Since Obama took office, the workforce has only grown from 154.2 million to 155 million in this latest report. It should have grown to at least 158 million. Using the baby boomers as an excuse for Obama's failed job policies is, in itself, inexcusable because it is a lie.
Pew Research False Claim of 10,000 Baby Boomer Reach 65 Each Day: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1834/baby-boomers-old-age-downbeat-pessimism
Probability of U.S. Males Reaching Age 65 (see #32 on list): http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_pro_of_rea_65_mal-health-probability-reaching-65-male
Probability of U.S. Females Reaching Age 65 (see #33 on list): http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_pro_of_rea_65_mal-health-probability-reaching-65-male
Even Republican Eric Cantor Is Given A "True" on a FactCheck "Truth-O-Meter" for Quoting the 10,000 Per Day Number (Cantor should have known better): http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/may/04/eric-cantor/rep-eric-cantor-says-10000-baby-boomers-day-are-be/