OzTennis

A study in the UK by Uni of Newcastle reported a few days ago that average life expectancy in the UK is rising by 5 hours a day (5 years every 24; by 1 year every 4.8 yrs). An Australian study found similar things:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/ag...107-2x482.html

'My Generation' once sang about hoping to die before they get old and Neil Young 30 years ago said it's better to burn out than to fade away and wishes to move from out of the blue and into the black (die). Pete Townshend and he are now well into their 60's and glad they made it.

It's one of the biggest challenges facing mankind - ageing population, resourcing it, individuals providing for it and so on. In the UK for example "the number of people of working age for every person of state pension age is projected to fall from 3.2 to 2.7 in 2037" (that's with the expected increase in the state pension age which will probably be 75 by 2037).

The paradox in all this is that a generation ago it was thought that people would start work later in life, retire earlier in life (have a shorter working life) and enjoy their brief retirement years. The reality is that a smaller % of the population are going to work more years to provide for themselves and through their taxes - others.

Heavy subject I know but something which faces us all. Discuss.

(2 brilliant songs incidentally)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=594WLzzb3JI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0O1v_7T6p8U

BASHO

All good if anyone will employ the aged/aging population .

Perhaps the currently off-shored of divisions of many telephone help services could actually be done by an at home networked team of ole farts ?

The affordable tech capability is here , the affordable ole farts are here.

But are the management co-ordination skills ?

Woops .

Chortlepuss

The demographics are truly shocking - but at least can be anticipated/predicted. In a country where people are considered over the hill by 50, expected to live till 80+ how are the ole farts supposed to survive if not by working? Yet big business concentrates effort on a diminishing supply of younger resources at the expense of recruiting the ole farts, who to be honest are a pretty capable bunch and not immune to a bit of retraining if needs must. The companies that have worked out a response to dealing with shifting demographics will be the ones that thrive in future times.

GarryP

The young are dumb and will work all hours for little pay. The old won't wear that sh*t, they've seen it all before and know the games managers play - answered by a few of their own games. So nope, there will be no jobs for the 40+, unless they can parley a tacit skill base into something those manager HAVE to have. Given the cycle time on new tech and new ideas - that won't get them out 30 years.

And given the destruction of blue collar work and the mobility of the rest, the young that have the jobs won't be accepting of ploughing money into supporting the old.

Australia is luckier than the UK in that its demographics look better than those with the baby boom. The Oz boom is later, mitigated by migration.



Those boomers are going to retire, and they are going to want their pensions, pension invested in the stock market. So there will be a net outflow of funds from investment in company stock, reducing their value, meaning more has to be extracted to pay the pensions (and that's on top of crashes cause by finance industry fraud). This is while there are less workers, so less new pension funds. Sound like a pyramid scheme?

So upshot is a very real 'granny wars' - where the grey vote tries to force politics to do their bidding, and the 'young and dumb' vote is sick of the corruption of politics and increasingly wants all of them gone.

Just wait till those unemployed pensioners with no money work out that nicking stuff is comparatively risk free for them.