I was thinking about this, and I think this is the idea she actually wants to promote.
In states that have extensive social services, yes. I hate going into Deep Thoughts territory here, but many welfare regimes intended for retirees were created in times when people lived much shorter lives, so that the elderly wouldn't rely on the system for long, and that population growth was assumed to be exponential for the foreseeable future, so that more new workers would replace the outgoing workers and be able to support the latter financially. Of course, those systems are so popular among the more politically-active older generations that they're untouchable and cannot be adapted to current demographic trends.Dont you need a younger generation to replace the older generation as far as workers go? Also who are you going to tax when the older generation needs government services?