G'day there HASBEEN...

I (again) reiterate, this particular scenario is NOT mine, in reality it was suggested to me and others, during a recent social event ? Having stated it though, I would like to explore the views and opinions of others - Accordingly I'd particularly like to extrapolate this scenario just a little further ? Essentially because I honestly believe that such a bizarre proposal could gain some considerable traction in the future, as medical science determines that we humans do eventually, 'wear out' therefore render us redundant ?

As usual HASBEEN, everything you've stated in your latest thread I totally endorse, though most of your suggestions will never see the light of day. Notwithstanding they're both pragmatic and invariably sensible, but largely illusionary, which is a great pity in my opinion ?

Interestingly, while listening to the radio as I type this, I heard someone lamenting on the amount of debt we have here in Oz, all the while marvelling at the amount of success the British and NZ governments enjoy, by reducing excessive debt, and increasing their economy ? Of course it's easier for them, neither have a Senate, a Senate that incessantly blocks every tiny initiave the ABBOTT government tries to introduce, in order to reign in debt and get our economy working positively again ?

Speaking of the stark contrasts that you drew attention to, where you described the excessive number of superfluous and redundant boards and committees that are choking governments in their quest to save money ? You simply can't do that ? Labour thrives of huge governments HASBEEN !

Dear O Sung Wu,

I'm a bit more optimistic about our future.

I believe that new economic systems must emerge
that will allow us to share the world efficiently
but also justly. A world in which as stated on
another discussion (similarities between
capitalism and communism) some people die
systematically from malnutrition while others throw away
the necessary food to feed them will not work any
longer.

Our values must change to base one's self-worth on
the quality of one's relationships and experiences instead
of the number of their possessions. Access to quality
resources for all of the world's people must take
precedence over satisfying insatiable desires of the few.

If we, the middle-class can have the life-saving and
life-rewarding tools of modernity, so can everyone. As
long as there are not too many of us. That is a
fundamental caveat. The planet we have come to inhabit is very
small. The experts who measure human demands on the planet
suggest if - by some miracle of economics - everyone living
today was to have a middle-class lifestyle, we would need
immediately two or three more planet earths.

Humans have the intelligence, the tools and the natural resources
to provide for a good, sustainable life as long as there are not
so many humans that we exceed the globe's carrying capacity.

All the evidence suggests that we must turn around population
growtn and aim for a much smaller population than we have today.
That is something worth debating.

Hi there BANJO...

A very legitimate question I'm sure ! It was just a quiet time after the tumult of ANZAC day, and we're all just sitting around quietly all very tired, when one of our number said he was getting too old to consider marching in future ANZAC Marches, to which we all agreed. He then went on and opined as it were, what he reckoned would happen to older people in the generations to came. What government support would older citizens expect, and it went on from there ...? I might add, of our small group, only two of our number managed to 'form-up' and half complete the March, both retiring (dropping out) about Market Street.

You see BANJO, it's not so much the length of the March, it's all the standing around during the forming up process, in our various Battalions, that many of us find particularly tiring ? Remember if you will, most of the blokes are now in their late sixties early seventies and are no longer fit enough to stand around for prolonged periods ? Anyway, that's how this weird Topic was raised !

In any event, this Topic can certainly precipitate significant discussion, when one considers the problems governments of the future will need to embrace. If they don't well...?

With increasing populations, the fact we're living much longer, food shortages, climate change, the advent of another protracted world conflict (Muslims Vs. Christian devotees), and many other complications and problems yet to afflict our modern society. Decisions will need be made concerning the overall welfare of our aged ? Like it or not, we have to accept, that we human beings also wear out and, become redundant ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

I dislike greatly the reliance on negative
stereotypes about any minority - but especially
the one that insists on that one age category
is in some respects inferior to other age
categories and that unequal treatment is therefore
justified.

Specifically, where it is held that the mental or
physical abilities of the aged are so diminished that
they are unable to play a full role in society and
may therefore be excluded from significant
participation. This ideology takes no account of
individual differences and instead treats all old
people as though age were their single most important
characteristic.

For example it is widely believed that the old are not
such productive workers as the young (actually, they
have better job-attendance and productivity records);
that many or most of them are infirm (more than 80
percent of the population over sixty-five are fully
capable of getting around on their own); that a high
proportion of the aged are senile (only a very small 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 (again only a small proportion 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 older
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 older
people may be, it provides an implicit justification for
excluding them from significant roles in the economy, the
family, and other areas of society.

No wonder people insist on lying about their age
"Don't trust anyone over thirty!"

Yeah right!

Hi FOXY...

I'm in complete agreement with EVERYTHING you've said in your last thread, absolutely. However, older folk are very much like cars ? As they age, they become much more unreliable (our physical well being) and in order to keep them on the road, costs an inordinate amount of money (the cost of our health care). There comes a point when it becomes uneconomical, to repair the old vehicle, and it's later scrapped ? A sad reality, nevertheless a reality FOXY.

That said, I'm in complete agreement with everything you've stated in your most recent contribution. Somewhere FOXY there's an IMPORTANT Topic just waiting to be introduced to this Forum? " The socio/economic impact of natural aging, and the effect it has on an individual" ? Or a similar title ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

Why don't you start a new discussion on the
problems involved with the ageing process.
Problems like health, medical expenses,
work, retirement, depression, isolation,
and dependence on society - living in
an unfamiliar environment where one relies
for medical and other needs on professional staff
rather than on friends or relatives.

This is such a broad topic but it would make for
an interesting discussion.