The treatment of the ageing population as a problem really reveals today's lack of imagination and human aspiration. Incapable of celebrating humanity's leaps forward, we instead see our success stories in medicine and living standards as something bad.

Older people are looked on as burdens on the health and social security system
They are seen as pollutants, unnecessary carbon footprints.

"Are Grandma and Grandpa bad for the environment?" An ethics writer recently complained that young people will, "suffer the environmental consequences of older people's behavior".

Yet experts warn there might be intergenerational conflict if old people stay in the jobs market at a time when youngsters are finding it difficult to get work.

So, the elderly should be put out to pasture, ejected from productive society and left to potter around their houses with their hobbies and their flowers where they belong.

Unable to come up with solutions for making elderly people's lives more pleasant through allowing them to work, paying them higher pensions or finding other ways to include them in the social make-up, we label them burdens.

One solution to this problem can be taken from the books of antiquity and evolution where you were not qualified to teach until you had become redundant in the community as a worker reproducer, with the experience of a lifetime to shape your thoughts and attitudes, having seen war and death, flood and drought, feast and famine

The plus side to this, is to release hundreds of thousands of "teachers" to the productive betterment of society, where they too are no longer a burden to be paid for by taxes.

This "shortens" the teacher entropy cycle (by death) to less than 15 years which would enable quicker response to change so allowing the next generation to reverse excesses and poor decisions of the current ruling generation

Overall a "win win" situation for all "stakeholders" ("stakeholder": the politically correct version of "medieval vampire killer")

Dear Mawsouth,

I remember one of my lecturers giving the
following reply to a young student who
had remarked, "That's 'cause you're so old!"
The lecturer smiled and said, "Ah, but you're
temporarily young!" And that fact many of us
tend to somehow forget.

I wish that we did live in a society - where
older people were looked upon as "Elders,"
from whom we could learn so much.

But I suppose in any unequal society the
dominant stratum uses an ideology to justify
its position - therefore unequal treatment
is justified. The sad part of this is that
the ideology of ageism takes no account of
individual differences, and instead treats
all old people as though age were the single
most important chanractieristic.

An important feature is its reliance on
negative stereotypes about the minority concerned.
For example, it's widely believed that the old are
not such productive workers as the young. Actually,
they have better job attendance records and
productivity records. Another myth is that many of
them are infirm. More than 80 oercent of the
population over sixty-five are fully capable of
getting around on their own. Another myth is that
a high proportion of the aged under seventy-five
display symptoms of senility; or that many of the
elderly are confined to nursing homes or old-age
homes. The statistics indicate that only 4 percent
of those over sixty five are in this situation.

In addition, there are a variety of beliefs about
the typical personalities of the aged - that they are
cranky, forgetful, sexless, highly conservative,
and the like - beliefs that either ignore the vast
differences among old people (for, after all,
individuals grow more different, not more similar,
as they age), or have no basis in fact whatsoever.

But no matter how inaccurate the public stereotype
of the aged may be, it provides an implicit
justification for excluding them from significant
roles in the economy, the family, and other areas of
society.

However, when society discriminates - best to
remember - each and everyone of us is only
"temporarily young!"

Foxy I found your post extremely insightful particularly regarding stereotypes and the perception of the young towards the older people in this country. Your lecturer at Uni must have been a bit of a wag, he certainly hit the nail on the head. I wonder do people honestly think it will never happen to them?

It is how you feel not your age that dictates your ability to continue to work and play after 65 and genes to a certain extent. Let me tell you young people have no idea I am 65. So good post Foxy.

I find Mr. Rudd's comments about the aging population astounding from a Prime Minister, particularly considering the thousands of migrants he has already allowed to settle here and the outrageous number he intents to continue to allow to settle here. His statements and policies are starting to worry me.

If this government wants the country to support the number of people predicted they had better start doing something constructive and put infrastructure in place to sustain those numbers quoted in the Intergenerational Population Report - another committee set up by this government to 'look at things'. Stop blaming the aging community; it's no more than a blame game to deflect attention away from their inadequate planning policies. They want the people here, then they have to provide the means to support them in work, housing and living standards.

Of course the government should seriously look at legalising euthanasia. Many elderly and sick people don't want to be a burden on society, it's the last thing they want. People should be able to take dignified steps to end their life.

Foxy,
Sorry to be a drudge but IMO the reason we have this stereotyping is that the older generation are less likely to be hyper consumers.
Ask yourself how many fashion shops in a shopping centre cater to the older the larger sizes. How many older people buy new mobiles every year, the latest gadgets, cars ,Car accessories, comparatively few.
Yet, the baby boomers are the largest demographic!
The truth is consumerism is a youth dominated market.
There is more money marketing for the below tweenies than us.

The constant focus in the consumer market on stick women has been declared a bad influence on the young ones.
Compare all that with ads profiling older people on TV their either portrayed as someone to lavish on the younger generation, go away to some retirement home.
Even cruises which are dominated by the older generation are marketed to the young.
My daughter noted that on her 'fun' cruise of 2000 there were 19 singles around her age 23 yet reading the brochures......

With a society well and truly wedded to consumerism, money/profit is everything it seems to me to be inevitable that the old are percieved as a drain, surplus to requirements...hindrances to exuberant fun, by the youth, their conditioned that way.

Even stranger danger is geared at the older men, when they are actually less than 5% of child abduction/sexual assault crime.

Conclusion: we have allowed this to happen in the search of consumerist focus on the most profitable/easiest to appeal to (instant gratification) demographic. The family is now different as a consequence. The meaningful extended family is dying of lack of easy profit as a demographic .

Dear RaeBee,

Thanks for your comments.

Ageism against the elderly is often subtle,
but it is pervasive. Look at the ads on
TV. Almost always they present youthful,
attractive people. When older characters
appear, they're likely to have health
problems and to be promoting health-related
devices: old people are almost totally
absent from commercials about cars, appliances,
clothing, or home-care products.

Advertising, like so many other aspects of
the media, often reflects the "fountain of youth"
theme that courses through a culture in which
people are encouraged to believe that creams,
soaps, lotions, colourings, vitamins, diet pills,
exercise machine, sports cars or whatever, will
make them look like a young adult forever.

Ageist bias is even revealed in people's
attitudes towards their own age. Children and
adolescents often wish they were older and sometimes
overstate their own age, for they correctly see that
their own age status is a low one. Middle-aged people,
on the other hand, often understate their ages, for
they know that the years devalue people the older they
get.

This is especially true for women, who, because they
are socialized to place so much importance on their
youthful looks, are more devalued by advancing age
than men are. Take a look at the remarks I've been
getting since I announced that I'm a first-time gran.
All of a sudden Foxy's become "old." Perhaps behind
this attitude lies not just a fear of aging, but a
fear of death. In our society death has become almost
a taboo subject, and its a phenomenon associated with
old age. I firmly believe in the right to die - but
that's another issue, and I don't want to go into it
on this thread.

Dear Examinator,

Of course you're right in what you say about
the marketing of products - and the target
audience. Old people don't seem to matter in
the scheme of things. However, it shouldn't
be that way. Researchers should take a closer
look. We see older people driving more expensive
cars, buying more expensive clothing, furniture,
shopping in more selective shops, eating out in
restaurants, going to the movies, theatres, going
on holidays, staying in hotels, travelling, going
on cruises, and so on. Older people usually have
more money to spend. They're not stuck with
mortgages, children to educate, raise families.

Perhaps it's time that they received some recognition
of their worth - especially from the politicians.

Thanks for the comments
one of the reasons for the "tone" of my original post was to test the waters to find general attitudes to "oldies"
so now I am really asking, should we "oldies" accept blame as per the inter generational report for the economic ineptitude of this and previous governments, and the excess of "bad will" from a "worker-reproducer generation" for their current predicaments. or should we attempt to put it in balance.

We should remember there has been no real infrastructure development since we left the "arena" and mostly we built and paid for the original hospital, roads and international airport systems and look at its state now. What is being quoted and forced on us is the classic textbook arguments I was forced to read and learn in uni in the early eighty's. The workforce participation value of 65 percent is measured by the ABS as 18 to 65 yo without counting anyone in full time education and it has reduced in the last couple of years by 5 percent. Do we oldies now need to "prop up" a "failed" system and if so how. Yes I am retired but I would be willing to teach 15-20 hours a week, It would keep me young.

Dear Mawsouth,

I didn't realize that teachers had to retire
at 65. I thought that because there's such
a shortage of teachers - that you could keep
on teaching well into your 70s - especially
in rural areas.

Anyway, doesn't the current government want to extend
the retirement age?

Love to Foxy but there is a problem. I only have "life Skills" not teaching quals. so the department of ageism would reject me

Dear Mawsouth,

Ah, well, then - how about challenging
yourself? Acquire the teaching credentials
that you need? As a "mature age" student -
set yourself up at either uni or tafe or
whatever - set yourself a goal - and go for it!
What else have you got to do? This way - you'll
be putting your "life-skills," to good use!

I always believe - that if you've got the time
to complain about something - then you've
got the time to do something about it!

If you've got the passion - you've got the
solution!

Foxy
It is nice to see that you are just opting out....
I Quote.

http://www.smartcompany.com.au/boss-lady/20100201-don-t-call-me-old.html

"The aging generation as they have now been dubbed has given the Coalition a new line of attack. Abbott, as he did today, can now accuse Rudd of demeaning older Australians with the suggestion that they are responsible for the nation's economic problems.

But politics aside, Abbott has a point. Lumping an entire generation into the "ageing" category is extremely limiting. Within this old fuddy-duddy group you have a huge array of very wealthy, sophisticated people with masses of money to spend – or leave behind. You also have a deep skill set, leadership skills and acquired wisdom.

And these people have time on their hands and the energy to spend their money and pass on their skills. They will not take kindly to being dumped into the ageing category."

But it might also be nice to "Live a little longer" in a world outside your head and see your great grand kids too
you could also research this site http://primaryschooling.net/?page_id=231

and think about what your current grandchild will go through at school

or read (if you can) my paper which has been submitted to Parliament http://www.jtomkins.com/engage/Lateralthoughts.pdf

Exactly Foxy. One of my lovely neighbours in her late 50's decided to become a teacher after raising her six children [beautifully]and 8 yrs ago completed her correspondence primary school teaching. Still loving teaching and well loved by staff and students.

To everyone, I agree with all your comments. In any case, the aging population is not the burden the government would have people believe. Who would take care of granchildren when mothers have to go out to work and after school hours. Not all can afford child care, so grandparents step in, I know I do.

Voluntary services are mainly carried out by the older generation. What amount of money can you put on that.

And then there are the people who look after sick and invalided parents, children, friends that would otherwise be a burden on the government pocket. Not that there are places for most of these people to be cared for anyway. They have to be cared for at home, the government has made sure of that.

No, it seems to me it was a 'shift the blame game'. However, I heard Wayne Swan side-stepping quicker than a grannie at a barn dance this morning. Bit late though Mr. Rudd already put his foot well and truly in it... One day that man will say something worthwhile and keep a few promises. I hope.

Dear Mawsouth,

My apologies for not being able to respond
to you earlier - but I had used up all of
my posts on this thread.

However, I'm not "opting out," as you put it.
My retirement is still a long way off yet.
And it is unfortunate that the Intergenerational
Report did not suggest policy and social reforms
that would make it easier to cope with people's
longevity. That would have been more useful than
trivialising the problem merely with statistics -
that don't mean all that much. New government
policies and a shift in social attitudes is what's
needed.

My point to you was - to do something about your
"life-skills," if you want to contribute. Apart
from obtaining the necessary teaching qualifications -
you can also volunteer. Local Councils badly need
volunteers for all sorts of activities - from helping
out with "Men's Sheds," to homeless youth, to aged-care
and senior citizens. Then there's fostering of children,
assisting lecturers at University of Third Age programs,
and so on. All you have to do is enquire - in whatever
field appeals to you. Where there's a will - there's a
way.

I went on and studied full-time while holding down a
full-time job and raising a family - with my husband's
support - of course. I was determined to do it -
and I did.

We are living longer - as the report points out - and
extending the retirement age to 67 by 2023, is a step
in the right direction - people will still be able
to retire earlier. However, the key seems to be new
government policies and social reforms. Hopefully
these will come in due course.

Yes, an aging population should not be trivialised. However, from my experience the workplace, particularly public service and health is such an over bearing wear on the middle echelons, that's the work place - not upper management; they look after themselves, the employees cannot wait to get out if they get to the required retirement age. They have simply had enough of over bearing management, productivity without support as well as demeaning and bullying of some who cannot stand up for themselves, the public service and health system is fraught with this type of management style. It is rampant.

The governments, state and federal most likely the largest work force employer in this country, wonder why people will not stay in the workplace longer, it is the workplace management and style.
When you see you are no longer going to be used as a slave to the system and your super is to a level you might just be able to be unshackled, you grab your gear and get out without even a backward look or regret.

Many skilled, intelligent people would stay but not at the expense of their health and absolute lack of appreciation for their contribution and future contribution. I do not exaggerate. There are no bonuses, nor social networking, support from 'human resource units' normally called personnel units in non existant, it is all a 'them against us' in health and the public service.

And I cannot emphasise enough how much I hate the term "Human Resource Unit". It sounds like something out of a medical horror or science fiction novel.

Medicos are also bullied and undervalued and leave the public hospital system, it's the reason for the loss of numbers of qualified medicos in this country. They go private or overseas where they can be their own boss and not be taken down by the health system. Why not, there is no incentive to stay.

So having got completely off the subject, no the aging population is undervalued...sorry.

Dear RaeBee,

I understand where you're coming from.
Many people feel the way you do.
However, I wonder how those same people
who left their places of work - and retired
early - would feel today - if they were
offered the opportunity to return to work
again either full or part time?

I've heard so many stories from various people
that retirement is not all that it's cracked
up to be. And - "If you don't use it you lose it!"
They miss the adult contact - and the mental
stimulation. As a matter of fact, a work colleague of my
husband's retired early - and after a few years -
he went down hill - mentally and physically.
Today - his friends don't recognise him.

I think it's a question probably - of changing
direction. If you're not happy in a particular job -
leave and find another - re-train if you need to -
but do something about it - don't just stay in a
miserable situation. Retirement will come soon
enough - but be sure that's what you really want.
And are ready for it. Don't just do it because
you're stuck in a job you don't like. Retirement
will be for the rest of your life - and once done -
it's hard to change things.

So what am I ASKING
That for 40 minutes of a students "time constrained week" they be given the challenge of teaching modern communications to seniors

* individual students or a class would connect to a pool of seniors
* ask questions to ascertain what the senior would like to learn
* explore the seniors experience and language base to gain ideas
* or create a common language set from shared ideas.
* Agree on the lesson format content and learning goals.
* create interactive lesson demonstrations
* or remote assist computer to computer
* get feedback from the senior on success or failure

Senior "profiles" to be available at a portal site and technology like "go to meeting" be used initiate the "voice conference" call.

the "portal" site will be the final repository for created lessons thus building a shared resource.

Students would add comments to a "Student View" to enable them to keep "like a blog" notes,and other information the senior has provided as a "resource" usable in other classes

This is only limited by the students record keeping, lateral thoughts, imagination and social skills.

seniors of differing opinions could be invited to take part in "conference debates" with the class on a subject.

Normally organizing such a visit face to face is impossible here this possible in "real time" to draw expertise from all over Australia.

Traditionally communities are limited by distance and constrained by time, but in this case we have created a useful construct of social interaction with minimal cost which benefits all parties.

It takes a community to fix a community problem.

so when you say "YOU SHOULD" mean "I CAN" and think of the benefit of this happening in EVERY SCHOOL in Australia
The technology is easy, built and tested it in REAL situations .
If you read my paper, you would see hardware costings and running costs.
Will YOU be a target to be "quizzed by a class". or be taught new tricks by an 8 yo, I am, but I am only 1 and I need 100,000 more

Dear Mawsouth,

Considering that there already exists
the "University of The Third Age,"
with a wide variety of programs for
mature-age people - or anyone
interested in acquiring news skills,
in a huge diversity of subjects - with
qualified teachers.
I can't see your suggestion being
taken up.

However - I wish you Good Luck - with
your attempt!

See you on another thread.