The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > We are working less while living longer > Comments

We are working less while living longer : Comments

By Ross Elliott, published 10/3/2016

If they still retire at age 60, they will have 16 years of retirement. They will work for only 38 years or just 50% of their life.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Of course we should work longer, but only if the "work" is done sitting at a desk, lightening up neural pathways.

Yes getting old can be costly, but only because of predatory big pharma and others who benefit financially (Billions) from managing symptoms?

While it seems self evident, that preventative medicine that prevents old age being accompanied by expensive infirmity, successful preventative medicine is routinely rejected by those with skin in the current game?

Even so, it doesn't mean we should simply accept their gratuitous advice!

But instead embrace preventative therapies like hyperbaric oxygen therapy, that revitalizes some stroke victims if applied soon enough?

Ditto many spinal injuries and subsequent cord injuries! And there is ongoing research into it as a adjunct treatment for cancer, or some viral infections?

And just because a spectacularly successful therapy has run out of patent or a patent is not applicable is not a reason to reject it out of hand (chelation therapy) and the benefits that it can endow.

However, some "doctors" will insist it is only a proven 50 year old therapy for lead poisoning. Conversely, we used it in the laboratory as a reagent that also precipitated arsenic, mercury, carcinogenic cadmium and others too numerous to mention.

And although there can be some unwanted side effects to HRT, lower medically managed doses that also include mandatory HGH, minimises them; even so, I believe, the benefits hugely outweigh any possible minimal side effects.

And given this therapy can and does reverse osteoporosis, much cheaper than the inevitable fractures that fill our hospital beds with oldies, whose fractures can and do take twice as long to heal!

As already noted, an ounce of cheap prevention is far better than a ton of enormously expensive cures!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 10 March 2016 10:35:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Great article. But a bit chilling.

I'm alright jack! In my nether years I receive financial management advice and insurance from the:

Commonwealth Bank
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 10 March 2016 10:52:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Many of the problems associated with aging are because of reduced blood flow to important organs, heart, brain etc. And in effect reducing critical oxygen even when the blood is fully oxygenated and no evidence of cyanosis? Statins, the biggest money spinner for big pharma is claimed to overcome some of this as does a range of vitamins D, Q10, Omega oil and other essential nutrients? In a recent double blind study, all those not given the placebo, suffered some cognitive impairment? And hardly worth any claimed benefits, for just 9 extra months vegetating in a high care nursing home, and at a cost of $70,000.00+ per to the taxpayer.

Type into your search engine, the case against statins.

Conversely, medically managed chelation therapy with EDTA, over time cleans out hardened arteries? The cause of most of the diseases of aging!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 10 March 2016 11:13:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Maybe for all you feckless baby boomers but the rest of us are going to be lucky to reach retirement age the way things are going.
Between an ever receding age qualification, climate destruction and the coming epidemics, least of which being obesity, the current generation of oldies will likely become the high water mark for longevity and privilege for quite a few generations.
Posted by mikk, Thursday, 10 March 2016 12:33:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting article.

"What is our plan for funding a life where half of that life is outside work?"

I think the flaw in this article is that it assumes a top-down command-and-control solution. But there's simply no reason for this assumption. In fact government interventions have made, and will make matters worse.

"Do we simply suggest that seniors have to work longer?"

Who's "we"? If you mean the State, say so. We are not the State, and the State is not us. And don't assume superior knowledge, capacity and goodness on the part of the State.

There is no need for the State to suggest anything. The income and expenses of seniors will do all the suggesting necessary. If the State has made promises to support people that it can't keep, the problem is the State's false representations and defalcations, not people living longer.

If by "we" you mean the people of the world, there is no reason to think that some people are entitled to be supported at everyone else's expense for 30 years just because they are older.

I understand that when the old age pension was introduced, the ratio of workers to pensioners was something like 27:1. Now it's something like 3:1 and falling.

People can expect the State to pay their way all they like, but reality kicks in and eventually the State runs out of other people's money. This is going to happen all over the western world. All the welfare states have unsustainable and growing liabilities.

Anyone now working who is relying on the old age pension for retirement is going to be disappointed, and compulsory super won't be much better; and that's before Bill Shorten lets the unions use it as their plaything. There's going to be tears before bedtime.

I can't see what's wrong with people working to support themselves if they need to. There is no magic pudding.

(cont.)
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Thursday, 10 March 2016 3:47:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's why it's important for people to be free, as much as possible, to make a living and to build wealth, without having their efforts strangled in red tape, and the fruits of their labours confiscated, by the State with all its promises of a socialist utopia that always turn to ash.

The problem is not people living longer. This is just a typical statist socialist mindset that regards the existence of human beings as a problem, because their economic theory is incapable of the concept of harmonising supply, demand, and price.

The problem is the government expropriating people of the possibility of providing for their retirement by its thoroughgoing restrictions of productive freedoms, and confiscations of capital and income; and all on the basis of promises that government does not, or cannot and will not keep.

If the same prudential principles that the government imposes on private companies, were imposed on the social security system, the government would all be prosecuted for fraud.
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Thursday, 10 March 2016 3:51:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy