Employment population ratio

And it discontinued in 2013. Missing are children and retired boomers.  It is that downward trend that makes CBO numbers go up, but it is not reflected as unemployment. However, it is really involuntary incentives that drive the volatility, the various common labor contracts over the various boomer sub groups causing stampede effects.

Things like variable retirement ages, early payouts, and reactions to recessions. This volatility is equivalent to involuntary layoffs, but not counted. Over the complete spectra,we will price equalize this volatility, it ends up in the sticky labor accounts nonetheless and we get a backwards repricing.

Not all of the variance is right to coin. A four point variation over 30 years?  Measurable, but a fairly small ATM fee, the the driver of misery. The bigger cost are those middle cycles, the election cycles. We have a sort of battle of shifting the blame, and the hard bounds conflate a bit.  Right to coin pays a third.

My number, 8 T over the contract is high. But there are obvious productivity gains in that contract, and its renewal. The New Fed will collect a surplus of congestion fees, large aggregate accounts that need shorty end bets. But the New Fed is profitless, so we can see right away the New fed is buying extra market share.  The idea makes a whole lot of sense, a business deal with Congress, everyone should win something here. Banks and finance should get the reason, the repricing and find some Coasian symmetry, it becomes a tiny, fixed fee, over some long period.