One proposed solution to the funding problems faced by Social Security and Medicare is to increase the retirement age from 67 to 70. Although this would mean billions of dollars in savings for these federal programs, an unintended consequence may be:

a. a decrease in life expectancy. b. an increase in the unemployment rate. c. an increased number of elderly people in the workforce. d. less incentive for people to work longer. e. an increased incentive for people to work longer.

D. Less incentive for people to work longer.

Step-by-step explanation:

To begin with, social security programs in this context is aimed at insulating the work force against an unforeseen losses on earnings which may be caused by any eventualities.

From the case provided, we've established that a potent solution to the funding problem of the security plan is to increase the retirement age from 67 - 70. However, much ad this has the propensity to improve the funding gap, it comes with unintended consequence.

Option A posits that the increase in life expectancy is one of the unintended consequences. I posit that this is not true. On the other hand, this is not even a consequence, rather a positive posting. Also, increase in lifespan is caused by other factors that go beyond boosting the individual social security and medicare program.

Option B comments on an increased unemployment rate as an unintended consequence. This should not be. On the other hand, having billions of fund in a federal program should suggest an anticipated boost in government spending on critical infrastructure as a filip for improving the economic lives of the citizenry.

Option C comments on increase in number of elderly people in the workplace. Again, boosting the social security and medicare funding gap has nothing to do with the foregoing position. We want to believe this elderly ones are already in the workplace. Thus, it has no effect on general elderly people.

Option D states that less incentive for people to work longer. We must note that this people have been working for good part of their lives. Now, their retirement age has been increased from 67 - 70. Much as the security program is a good incentive, good percentage of individual's goes into. Now, there's is general increase in the funding level. The implication of this is that a old worker of such could be more interested in having the whole package which is believed to be ripe already, than working for more additional years.

Option E negates the foregoing reason. Hence, it is not part of the unintended consequence.

answer: 94

step-by-step explanation: 79+91+92+94+94 = 450 divided by 5 (since there are 5 number that are being added) = 90

i belive false if so your welcome if not well idk