Retirement spending and biological age
Moshe A. Milevsky and
Thomas S. Salisbury
Papers from arXiv.org
We solve a lifecycle model in which the consumer's chronological age does not move in lockstep with calendar time. Instead, biological age increases at a stochastic non-linear rate in time like a broken clock that might occasionally move backwards. In other words, biological age could actually decline. Our paper is inspired by the growing body of medical literature that has identified biomarkers which indicate how people age at different rates. This offers better estimates of expected remaining lifetime and future mortality rates. It isn't farfetched to argue that in the not-too-distant future personal age will be more closely associated with biological vs. calendar age. Thus, after introducing our stochastic mortality model we derive optimal consumption rates in a classic Yaari (1965) framework adjusted to our proper clock time. In addition to the normative implications of having access to biological age, our positive objective is to partially explain the cross-sectional heterogeneity in retirement spending rates at any given chronological age. In sum, we argue that neither biological nor chronological age alone is a sufficient statistic for making economic decisions. Rather, both ages are required to behave rationally.
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-age
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Published in J. Econom. Dynam. Control 84 (2017), 58-76
Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.09921 Latest version (application/pdf)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:1811.09921
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().