Explain to me like I am 5...How will we keep growing with an aging population?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

If it's expected that I have to work FULL TIME until 80s I'd rather be euthanized. Unless someone really loves their job to the point of passion, or they work some easy hobby job part time for social interaction nobody in their right mind aspires to be a wage slave till the day they drop dead with limited vacation time, living for a weekend, and having to answer to bosses and clients all day long majority of your day. F this.

I think if you sell this idea to young people that they have to work full time jobs they already loathe in their 20s for the rest of their lives you might get a huge uprising on your hands

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

In order for this to be a viable solution, you need older people to be healthier than they are. It's one thing for a wealthy white guy to work until he's 80 after decades of excellent healthcare in corporate jobs, and not doing hard labor. This is not the case for the vast majority of elderly people, who have disabilities that prevent them from doing a lot of even low-impact jobs. And it does nothing to solve the problem of a shortage in workers for physically demanding jobs in essential industries like agriculture, construction, infrastructure and maintenance, and healthcare. Heck, a significant number of the jobs in healthcare we need to fill are needed to care for the disabled elderly population. Sorry but there are no 80 yr olds who are going to take jobs as health aides whose whole job is help 80 yr olds.

I think if you've only ever known UMC and UC people working cushy white collar jobs, you may not understand how this really works. But who cleaned your granpa's house? Who mowed his lawn? Who *build* his house? Who built the roads he drove on? Who taught his kids to read? Who took his blood pressure at the doctor's office?

Think. We aren't facing a shortage of corporate executives here.

PP. You are being unnecessarily insulting. There are quite a lot of middle-class white collar workers. And pensions are going away so people don't get the automatic income they used to.

Regarding your rhetorical questions. My grandpa didn't move between the ages of about 50 and 94. He mowed his own lawn using a lawn tractor. And did a lot of home maintenance himself.

I have another relative, not so fancy but a bit of a layabout, who went to work as a care provider at an old folks home in his late 60s/early 70s because he still needed to earn some social security credits at that advanced age. He was able to perform that work.

I've run across a lot of older physicians lately. Meaning boomer-ish who look like they could retire if they want to (60s plus).

My elderly parents just had their chimney rebuilt and the main mason looked extremely old. But he was spry and did a good job. He had a younger man with him. Older people can retain a lot of muscle and dexterity if they are active their whole lives.

My kids have a sub at their school that is extremely old from their perspective. Possibly in her 80s. A famously-beloved elementary teacher just retired after 50! years of service. So she was at least 72.

My point is that people will come back into jobs if they need or want the money. No, they can't do every job.

Heck, I myself am wondering if when I'm old if I could be a nanny to a professional family. It seems like being a grandma babysitter could be worth at least $40K a year or more to a highly-compensated professional couple. "Household managers" even more.

It's not just UMC people's jobs that could continue to be done.

The concept of retirement was invented. It's not entirely natural.

No, you aren't getting it. We are facing a worker shortage and that worker shortage is NOT in white collar jobs. We have essential, blue collar jobs that it will become increasingly hard to find people to do because they need to be done by young, able-bodied people. We are not going to solve this problem by people working in their 70s and 80s because there will never be enough 70 and 80 year olds capable of working construction and doing nursing to make society function properly.

I'm glad that you don't feel like you need to retire. That's a you-specific issue though. I'm talking about middle and working class people who work the kind of jobs you physically cannot do past age 55 or 60, and the fact that we are not having enough babies or bringing in enough immigrants to do those jobs. You are being myopic in thinking this is about you and your family and your peer group. It's not. It's about society as a whole and society needs young, healthy workers to do a lot of stuff.

You are on point here. I have a family that worked physical jobs and now have disabilities.

Even most white collar professions have a lot of pressure which is hard for older people (even middle aged people) to handle. They have deliverables, deadlines, toxic coworkers and often after hours commitment. No way 65+ yr old is going to want to do this day in and day out, while begging for 2 consecutive weeks off and having to approve every sick day or not being able to get up in the morning if not feeling well.

Boss and consulting types who want a few highly compensated hours a week to simply participate in meetings (with no deliverables) and tell people what to do are more than there are available jobs for this type of service. If you manage to do this, good for you, you won a lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

If it's expected that I have to work FULL TIME until 80s I'd rather be euthanized. Unless someone really loves their job to the point of passion, or they work some easy hobby job part time for social interaction nobody in their right mind aspires to be a wage slave till the day they drop dead with limited vacation time, living for a weekend, and having to answer to bosses and clients all day long majority of your day. F this.

I think if you sell this idea to young people that they have to work full time jobs they already loathe in their 20s for the rest of their lives you might get a huge uprising on your hands

The truth is nobody wants full time job commitment shackles for the rest of their lives. Younger generation wants to shake this off even earlier.
American workforce with scarce vacation time and long work weeks serves as a motivation to retire early and accumulate assets that provide passive income. Everyone dreams about quitting and living off passive income while their bodies are still operational and they can enjoy life, travel, and fun activities.

It's more sustainable if we encourage creation of part time jobs and make them normal, decouple healthcare insurance from full time job commitment, and not frown upon people with gaps in their resume. This will allow more productive workforce participation and people aren't chasing exit plan. People could take sabbaticals or a few years off and then return into the workplace not feeling like they've been running the rat race and need to retire asap. Also, older people would participate more if part time professional jobs aren't unicorn arrangements.

The issue is not our population getting older only, it's also our workforce culture and arrangement that no longer meets modern needs and doesn't address modern issues. Healthcare system is a noose around our labor force neck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me like I am 5...How will we keep growing with an aging population?

Retired people save more than they spend. If savings rate go up, aren't interested rates going to go up as well?

Of course the US is very different from Japan, Germany and Italy.

But I am trying to understand how are going to keep growing with an aging population?

The answer is immigration. By 2050 all the surplus labor will be in subsaharan Africa and India. We need to train and import those people if we want our economies to grow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm sure the idea is that we will be able to get the labour we need when we need it? Where is labour going to come from? Some will say Asia and Africa. I'm not convinced south east Asia will be the solution.
.

Pretty sure there is no coming labour shortage. Optimus robots, AI agents, self driving cars and trucks, all put to use globally. Of course, so far, none of those pay taxes but governments tend towards continued existence so that’s likely to change.

We will tax the robots before you know it. Some politician will run on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

If it's expected that I have to work FULL TIME until 80s I'd rather be euthanized. Unless someone really loves their job to the point of passion, or they work some easy hobby job part time for social interaction nobody in their right mind aspires to be a wage slave till the day they drop dead with limited vacation time, living for a weekend, and having to answer to bosses and clients all day long majority of your day. F this.

It doesn't have to be expected. Those who don't like any job should manage their work, savings, and cost of living so they can retire earlier. Those who do like their job should be able to work longer.

My main points are related to the hypothesized labor shortage presented early in this thread. If labor is scarce, wages might rise and there may be less age discrimination. People who would like to work longer may be able to. People who need to work longer for whatever reason would also benefit from less age discrimination/greater acceptance of older people in the workplace.

There will be no need for your assisted suicide, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

In order for this to be a viable solution, you need older people to be healthier than they are. It's one thing for a wealthy white guy to work until he's 80 after decades of excellent healthcare in corporate jobs, and not doing hard labor. This is not the case for the vast majority of elderly people, who have disabilities that prevent them from doing a lot of even low-impact jobs. And it does nothing to solve the problem of a shortage in workers for physically demanding jobs in essential industries like agriculture, construction, infrastructure and maintenance, and healthcare. Heck, a significant number of the jobs in healthcare we need to fill are needed to care for the disabled elderly population. Sorry but there are no 80 yr olds who are going to take jobs as health aides whose whole job is help 80 yr olds.

I think if you've only ever known UMC and UC people working cushy white collar jobs, you may not understand how this really works. But who cleaned your granpa's house? Who mowed his lawn? Who *build* his house? Who built the roads he drove on? Who taught his kids to read? Who took his blood pressure at the doctor's office?

Think. We aren't facing a shortage of corporate executives here.

PP. You are being unnecessarily insulting. There are quite a lot of middle-class white collar workers. And pensions are going away so people don't get the automatic income they used to.

Regarding your rhetorical questions. My grandpa didn't move between the ages of about 50 and 94. He mowed his own lawn using a lawn tractor. And did a lot of home maintenance himself.

I have another relative, not so fancy but a bit of a layabout, who went to work as a care provider at an old folks home in his late 60s/early 70s because he still needed to earn some social security credits at that advanced age. He was able to perform that work.

I've run across a lot of older physicians lately. Meaning boomer-ish who look like they could retire if they want to (60s plus).

My elderly parents just had their chimney rebuilt and the main mason looked extremely old. But he was spry and did a good job. He had a younger man with him. Older people can retain a lot of muscle and dexterity if they are active their whole lives.

My kids have a sub at their school that is extremely old from their perspective. Possibly in her 80s. A famously-beloved elementary teacher just retired after 50! years of service. So she was at least 72.

My point is that people will come back into jobs if they need or want the money. No, they can't do every job.

Heck, I myself am wondering if when I'm old if I could be a nanny to a professional family. It seems like being a grandma babysitter could be worth at least $40K a year or more to a highly-compensated professional couple. "Household managers" even more.

It's not just UMC people's jobs that could continue to be done.

The concept of retirement was invented. It's not entirely natural.

No one wants your old butt as a nanny or house manager
Who the hell will be able to afford either once republicans are done killing jobs and the economy??

I disagree. It's quite hard in my area to find a reliable, highly-educated, legally-here young woman with full-day availability whom you would trust to drive your kids around town. And currently older people don't need to bother because they have pensions and Social Security. Or veterans' benefits. My grandma's senior living community was full of Silent Generation and Boomer people who were supporting themselves mainly with those kind of payments. But Gen-X doesn't often have that setup.

No matter what, there are always rich people. Rich Republicans will ensure that rich Republicans remain. No matter how hard you culminate. There are still rich people in Europe and Japan.

Your solution to 80-somethings needing work instead of retirement is to hire young women? Genius.

You did not follow the discussion and misunderstood.

[Anonymous]

In truth, there is no clear evidence that population growth necessarily improves a country’s standard of living.

To be sure, a larger population almost always results in a larger aggregate economy. More workers, more consumers, and more government spending will make for a larger GDP.

https://cis.org/Camarota/There-No-Evidence-Population-Growth-Drives-Capita-Economic-Growth-Developed-Economies#:~:text=In%20truth%2C%20there%20is%20no,make%20for%20a%20larger%20GDP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

If it's expected that I have to work FULL TIME until 80s I'd rather be euthanized. Unless someone really loves their job to the point of passion, or they work some easy hobby job part time for social interaction nobody in their right mind aspires to be a wage slave till the day they drop dead with limited vacation time, living for a weekend, and having to answer to bosses and clients all day long majority of your day. F this.

THIS. I’m only 48 and will be LIMPING to work until I’m 55. I’ve already confirmed my DH that he’s gonna hold the bag after that. I’m BURNT OUT. I’ve been working full time since age 18 and have raised 2 kids without a single break. I’m crashed out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

If it's expected that I have to work FULL TIME until 80s I'd rather be euthanized. Unless someone really loves their job to the point of passion, or they work some easy hobby job part time for social interaction nobody in their right mind aspires to be a wage slave till the day they drop dead with limited vacation time, living for a weekend, and having to answer to bosses and clients all day long majority of your day. F this.

THIS. I’m only 48 and will be LIMPING to work until I’m 55. I’ve already confirmed my DH that he’s gonna hold the bag after that. I’m BURNT OUT. I’ve been working full time since age 18 and have raised 2 kids without a single break. I’m crashed out.

I'm 47 and don't feel like this -- I'd be fine working part time for much longer and I like aspects of my job. But I have a cushy white collar job and I do not think I will physically be able to work full time into my 70s and 80s. I've had so many medical issues crop up just in the last couple years, I just cannot imagine working a full time job at that age while managing what I assume will be much more.

My dad developed cataracts in his early 70s and even with surgery and treatment, his eyesight is still not great. He had a pacemaker put in at 77 that limits his ability to do a lot of things. He can't drive anymore which limits his general mobility. He is actually in decent shape for someone rounding on 80 -- walks several miles a day, eats well, is very mobile and mental with it. But with his eyesight and his heart issues, I can't imagine him working even a part time job.

I have an aunt in her early 80s who is sharp as a tack... but can't work like that either. She tells me her max is about two hours of focusing on anything and then she has to go lie down. She loves to entertain and host but now her daughter and I come over to help her prep and she rests a lot, we don't want her to overdo it. She is a great lady but I'm so glad she doesn't have to work. She deserves to relax, visit with friends, spend time with her grandchildren. Just because she's not experience severe mental or physical decline doesn't mean she should be working. She has earned the right to rest.

Expecting 70 and 80 somethings to shoulder the burden of filling out the workforce is so shortsighted. If anyone in that age group wants to work, great! Expecting them to work is unkind and unrealistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

In order for this to be a viable solution, you need older people to be healthier than they are. It's one thing for a wealthy white guy to work until he's 80 after decades of excellent healthcare in corporate jobs, and not doing hard labor. This is not the case for the vast majority of elderly people, who have disabilities that prevent them from doing a lot of even low-impact jobs. And it does nothing to solve the problem of a shortage in workers for physically demanding jobs in essential industries like agriculture, construction, infrastructure and maintenance, and healthcare. Heck, a significant number of the jobs in healthcare we need to fill are needed to care for the disabled elderly population. Sorry but there are no 80 yr olds who are going to take jobs as health aides whose whole job is help 80 yr olds.

I think if you've only ever known UMC and UC people working cushy white collar jobs, you may not understand how this really works. But who cleaned your granpa's house? Who mowed his lawn? Who *build* his house? Who built the roads he drove on? Who taught his kids to read? Who took his blood pressure at the doctor's office?

Think. We aren't facing a shortage of corporate executives here.

PP. You are being unnecessarily insulting. There are quite a lot of middle-class white collar workers. And pensions are going away so people don't get the automatic income they used to.

Regarding your rhetorical questions. My grandpa didn't move between the ages of about 50 and 94. He mowed his own lawn using a lawn tractor. And did a lot of home maintenance himself.

I have another relative, not so fancy but a bit of a layabout, who went to work as a care provider at an old folks home in his late 60s/early 70s because he still needed to earn some social security credits at that advanced age. He was able to perform that work.

I've run across a lot of older physicians lately. Meaning boomer-ish who look like they could retire if they want to (60s plus).

My elderly parents just had their chimney rebuilt and the main mason looked extremely old. But he was spry and did a good job. He had a younger man with him. Older people can retain a lot of muscle and dexterity if they are active their whole lives.

My kids have a sub at their school that is extremely old from their perspective. Possibly in her 80s. A famously-beloved elementary teacher just retired after 50! years of service. So she was at least 72.

My point is that people will come back into jobs if they need or want the money. No, they can't do every job.

Heck, I myself am wondering if when I'm old if I could be a nanny to a professional family. It seems like being a grandma babysitter could be worth at least $40K a year or more to a highly-compensated professional couple. "Household managers" even more.

It's not just UMC people's jobs that could continue to be done.

The concept of retirement was invented. It's not entirely natural.

How old are you now? You may not feel the same when you get to old age. Yes, there was no retirement age just as there was no five-day work week or eight hour day. Go look up photos of families doing sewing piecework in their tenements at night by gaslight. People didn't want to starve so they worked until they died or a disease for which there was no cure took them. A 94 year old mowing the lawn is not the same as showing up in an office. I worked with some 80-somethings who had to work to survive. They had hearing loss and their reflexes and reaction times were slow. It was super frustrating to be their colleagues. They got into fender benders on the way to work. There really is a difference once you hit your late 70s. Thank goodness for the concept of retirement. It is also about the collective good. It's hard to work with very aged people and they are not as productive. They deserve to take it easy too. Why lionize working forever? I'd rather help out my family and friends in retirement.

Our culture doesn't value older people. I know that. But I'm shocked that you're citing hearing loss and reflex issues and your own impatience as reasons why older people shouldn't be working.

Also...you know older Americans aren't going to give up driving. So it's ridiculous to say it's worse to have them drive to work than to the senior center for a chat and a subsidized meal.

I agree that it's humane not to make older people do backbreaking work. But much of what people do these days doesn't require that. Any job that involves a computer and a chair. Or simple tasks like dogwalking.

Our retirement ages are set based on demographic phenomena from long ago and a higher proportion of body damaging manual labor (like factory work).

There are all kinds of possibilities for allowing seniors to continue to work. It just depends on whether the work is needed and wages are worth it. There's no need to recreate the miserable poverty of the past. We have a lot of solutions for the issues you raise. It's particularly funny you mention hearing. At my work, most of our time is spent on written communication (e-mails and chats). I'm pretty sure X-ers will remain sufficiently computer literate into old age to be employable.

Regarding "deserving to take it easy", a lot of people derive meaning from work. Whether it's fancy high-paid work or not. You mention helping family and friends in retirement. That is substituting unpaid care work for paid work. So you might mow their lawn, paint their house, drive them to appointments, and administer meds. That doesn't show up as "economic growth" but you are essentially planning to still do "work".

Dog walking can actually be incredibly dangerous for the elderly. Dog sees a squirrel, lunges for it, walker is thrown off balance, falls and breaks a bone. It’s very common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

In order for this to be a viable solution, you need older people to be healthier than they are. It's one thing for a wealthy white guy to work until he's 80 after decades of excellent healthcare in corporate jobs, and not doing hard labor. This is not the case for the vast majority of elderly people, who have disabilities that prevent them from doing a lot of even low-impact jobs. And it does nothing to solve the problem of a shortage in workers for physically demanding jobs in essential industries like agriculture, construction, infrastructure and maintenance, and healthcare. Heck, a significant number of the jobs in healthcare we need to fill are needed to care for the disabled elderly population. Sorry but there are no 80 yr olds who are going to take jobs as health aides whose whole job is help 80 yr olds.

I think if you've only ever known UMC and UC people working cushy white collar jobs, you may not understand how this really works. But who cleaned your granpa's house? Who mowed his lawn? Who *build* his house? Who built the roads he drove on? Who taught his kids to read? Who took his blood pressure at the doctor's office?

Think. We aren't facing a shortage of corporate executives here.

PP. You are being unnecessarily insulting. There are quite a lot of middle-class white collar workers. And pensions are going away so people don't get the automatic income they used to.

Regarding your rhetorical questions. My grandpa didn't move between the ages of about 50 and 94. He mowed his own lawn using a lawn tractor. And did a lot of home maintenance himself.

I have another relative, not so fancy but a bit of a layabout, who went to work as a care provider at an old folks home in his late 60s/early 70s because he still needed to earn some social security credits at that advanced age. He was able to perform that work.

I've run across a lot of older physicians lately. Meaning boomer-ish who look like they could retire if they want to (60s plus).

My elderly parents just had their chimney rebuilt and the main mason looked extremely old. But he was spry and did a good job. He had a younger man with him. Older people can retain a lot of muscle and dexterity if they are active their whole lives.

My kids have a sub at their school that is extremely old from their perspective. Possibly in her 80s. A famously-beloved elementary teacher just retired after 50! years of service. So she was at least 72.

My point is that people will come back into jobs if they need or want the money. No, they can't do every job.

Heck, I myself am wondering if when I'm old if I could be a nanny to a professional family. It seems like being a grandma babysitter could be worth at least $40K a year or more to a highly-compensated professional couple. "Household managers" even more.

It's not just UMC people's jobs that could continue to be done.

The concept of retirement was invented. It's not entirely natural.

How old are you now? You may not feel the same when you get to old age. Yes, there was no retirement age just as there was no five-day work week or eight hour day. Go look up photos of families doing sewing piecework in their tenements at night by gaslight. People didn't want to starve so they worked until they died or a disease for which there was no cure took them. A 94 year old mowing the lawn is not the same as showing up in an office. I worked with some 80-somethings who had to work to survive. They had hearing loss and their reflexes and reaction times were slow. It was super frustrating to be their colleagues. They got into fender benders on the way to work. There really is a difference once you hit your late 70s. Thank goodness for the concept of retirement. It is also about the collective good. It's hard to work with very aged people and they are not as productive. They deserve to take it easy too. Why lionize working forever? I'd rather help out my family and friends in retirement.

Our culture doesn't value older people. I know that. But I'm shocked that you're citing hearing loss and reflex issues and your own impatience as reasons why older people shouldn't be working.

Also...you know older Americans aren't going to give up driving. So it's ridiculous to say it's worse to have them drive to work than to the senior center for a chat and a subsidized meal.

I agree that it's humane not to make older people do backbreaking work. But much of what people do these days doesn't require that. Any job that involves a computer and a chair. Or simple tasks like dogwalking.

Our retirement ages are set based on demographic phenomena from long ago and a higher proportion of body damaging manual labor (like factory work).

There are all kinds of possibilities for allowing seniors to continue to work. It just depends on whether the work is needed and wages are worth it. There's no need to recreate the miserable poverty of the past. We have a lot of solutions for the issues you raise. It's particularly funny you mention hearing. At my work, most of our time is spent on written communication (e-mails and chats). I'm pretty sure X-ers will remain sufficiently computer literate into old age to be employable.

Regarding "deserving to take it easy", a lot of people derive meaning from work. Whether it's fancy high-paid work or not. You mention helping family and friends in retirement. That is substituting unpaid care work for paid work. So you might mow their lawn, paint their house, drive them to appointments, and administer meds. That doesn't show up as "economic growth" but you are essentially planning to still do "work".

Dog walking can actually be incredibly dangerous for the elderly. Dog sees a squirrel, lunges for it, walker is thrown off balance, falls and breaks a bone. It’s very common.

PP. I agree with the risk. But presumably people will know their limits. And lots of seniors have dogs. That's how you know people have accidents with them.

If you just want to sit around on your butts from age 60 until you die, be my guest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My personal thought is that people are going to work longer if they are healthy enough.

A lot of the retirees/forced-out older managers and execs from my F500 company seem to not fully retire. Even re-emerge with new full-time corporate jobs after a few years off.

My grandpa retired from a corporation at 65 and lived to be 94. He easily could have worked until 80-85.

If economics change in ways that make it useful or necessary for retiree age people to work, it will happen.

In order for this to be a viable solution, you need older people to be healthier than they are. It's one thing for a wealthy white guy to work until he's 80 after decades of excellent healthcare in corporate jobs, and not doing hard labor. This is not the case for the vast majority of elderly people, who have disabilities that prevent them from doing a lot of even low-impact jobs. And it does nothing to solve the problem of a shortage in workers for physically demanding jobs in essential industries like agriculture, construction, infrastructure and maintenance, and healthcare. Heck, a significant number of the jobs in healthcare we need to fill are needed to care for the disabled elderly population. Sorry but there are no 80 yr olds who are going to take jobs as health aides whose whole job is help 80 yr olds.

I think if you've only ever known UMC and UC people working cushy white collar jobs, you may not understand how this really works. But who cleaned your granpa's house? Who mowed his lawn? Who *build* his house? Who built the roads he drove on? Who taught his kids to read? Who took his blood pressure at the doctor's office?

Think. We aren't facing a shortage of corporate executives here.

PP. You are being unnecessarily insulting. There are quite a lot of middle-class white collar workers. And pensions are going away so people don't get the automatic income they used to.

Regarding your rhetorical questions. My grandpa didn't move between the ages of about 50 and 94. He mowed his own lawn using a lawn tractor. And did a lot of home maintenance himself.

I have another relative, not so fancy but a bit of a layabout, who went to work as a care provider at an old folks home in his late 60s/early 70s because he still needed to earn some social security credits at that advanced age. He was able to perform that work.

I've run across a lot of older physicians lately. Meaning boomer-ish who look like they could retire if they want to (60s plus).

My elderly parents just had their chimney rebuilt and the main mason looked extremely old. But he was spry and did a good job. He had a younger man with him. Older people can retain a lot of muscle and dexterity if they are active their whole lives.

My kids have a sub at their school that is extremely old from their perspective. Possibly in her 80s. A famously-beloved elementary teacher just retired after 50! years of service. So she was at least 72.

My point is that people will come back into jobs if they need or want the money. No, they can't do every job.

Heck, I myself am wondering if when I'm old if I could be a nanny to a professional family. It seems like being a grandma babysitter could be worth at least $40K a year or more to a highly-compensated professional couple. "Household managers" even more.

It's not just UMC people's jobs that could continue to be done.

The concept of retirement was invented. It's not entirely natural.

How old are you now? You may not feel the same when you get to old age. Yes, there was no retirement age just as there was no five-day work week or eight hour day. Go look up photos of families doing sewing piecework in their tenements at night by gaslight. People didn't want to starve so they worked until they died or a disease for which there was no cure took them. A 94 year old mowing the lawn is not the same as showing up in an office. I worked with some 80-somethings who had to work to survive. They had hearing loss and their reflexes and reaction times were slow. It was super frustrating to be their colleagues. They got into fender benders on the way to work. There really is a difference once you hit your late 70s. Thank goodness for the concept of retirement. It is also about the collective good. It's hard to work with very aged people and they are not as productive. They deserve to take it easy too. Why lionize working forever? I'd rather help out my family and friends in retirement.

Our culture doesn't value older people. I know that. But I'm shocked that you're citing hearing loss and reflex issues and your own impatience as reasons why older people shouldn't be working.

Also...you know older Americans aren't going to give up driving. So it's ridiculous to say it's worse to have them drive to work than to the senior center for a chat and a subsidized meal.

I agree that it's humane not to make older people do backbreaking work. But much of what people do these days doesn't require that. Any job that involves a computer and a chair. Or simple tasks like dogwalking.

Our retirement ages are set based on demographic phenomena from long ago and a higher proportion of body damaging manual labor (like factory work).

There are all kinds of possibilities for allowing seniors to continue to work. It just depends on whether the work is needed and wages are worth it. There's no need to recreate the miserable poverty of the past. We have a lot of solutions for the issues you raise. It's particularly funny you mention hearing. At my work, most of our time is spent on written communication (e-mails and chats). I'm pretty sure X-ers will remain sufficiently computer literate into old age to be employable.

Regarding "deserving to take it easy", a lot of people derive meaning from work. Whether it's fancy high-paid work or not. You mention helping family and friends in retirement. That is substituting unpaid care work for paid work. So you might mow their lawn, paint their house, drive them to appointments, and administer meds. That doesn't show up as "economic growth" but you are essentially planning to still do "work".

Dog walking can actually be incredibly dangerous for the elderly. Dog sees a squirrel, lunges for it, walker is thrown off balance, falls and breaks a bone. It’s very common.

PP. I agree with the risk. But presumably people will know their limits. And lots of seniors have dogs. That's how you know people have accidents with them.

If you just want to sit around on your butts from age 60 until you die, be my guest.

Uh, there’s a lot that people can do other than work, and that’s what people want to do. If you live to work, fine…but I feel sorry for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Explain to me like I am 5...How will we keep growing with an aging population?

Retired people save more than they spend. If savings rate go up, aren't interested rates going to go up as well?

Of course the US is very different from Japan, Germany and Italy.

But I am trying to understand how are going to keep growing with an aging population?

Why must we keep growing?

Why not just live smarter? Use technology to make everyone’s life easier rather than to make billionaires richer.

[Anonymous]

According to tech bros, AI will replace everyone. Therefore, we will have no jobs and either die or depend upon the tech bros for food.

I’m exaggerating but maybe not.

There is no plan because the old white men do not want one. They are too busy enriching themselves.