ABSTRACT In an era of increased intergenerational inequality, why do working-age adults continue to support government spending on the retired? Previous explanations for the popularity of such programs include calculations of expected reciprocity and evaluations of deservingness. We introduce an additional consideration: perceived vulnerability to ‘care risks’. That is, the fear of having to provide substantial financial or practical assistance to a close older family member. We argue this leads voters to insure themselves by supporting government assistance to the old as a substitute. Combining novel evidence from a specially-commissioned national survey and survey experiment conducted in Great Britain, we show that prime working-age adults’ (aged 18–59) concerns about having to personally provide for older relatives helps explain their enthusiasm for greater state investment in the retired. Familial concerns are an understudied constraint on age-based political polarisation. Our study provides important insights into how elderly-oriented public policy proposals might be justified to younger voters, and how family ties and expectations can explain public spending preferences in other generations.
Read full abstract