Non Sequitur

This New York Times article describes the phenomenon of older American workers making a disproportionate amount of money compared to their younger counterparts in relation to productivity and uses the recent Circuit City layoffs as a case study. It's an interesting article as far as it goes in terms of describing the phenomenon factually. Then there are the two final paragraphs:

"If companies aren’t going to provide health insurance, the government will need to. It can do so directly, through a single-payer system similar to those in other countries, or indirectly, by pooling together the uninsured and helping them buy coverage, as Massachusetts is now planning. If companies aren’t going to provide pensions, the government will have to provide better incentives to save, helping people overcome their natural instinct to choose a flat-panel TV today over an adequate retirement tomorrow. And if companies aren’t automatically going to give workers raises over the course of their lives, the country will probably need a new strategy for giving older workers new skills, something considerably more ambitious than the current, meager retraining programs.

"This is the real message of the Circuit City layoff, and it’s likely to be the great economic debate of the coming decade."

To which I simply respond "Non Sequitur."