An article appeared on the weekend about a new theory of aging being considered by the US National Bureau of Economic Research. It seems they want us to be given a new age. No, not 'new age'; an actual new way of measuring age!It seems they have worked out that as we get older, we should be classified by how much time we have left, not how much time we have spent on Planet Earth.
So I'm coming up to 61 in December; I may, depending on THEIR ASSESSMENT be termed a twenty year 'old' man, or if I had abused myself a bit more, a ten year 'old' man. They would call this RLE- Remaining life Expectancy.
'The aging of society is a lot less dramatic with the alternative mortality based age measures.' says John Shoven of Stanford University. They worry that if aging is unchecked, then government budgets will be crippled.
Are you confused too? Are they really saying they can change our aging process by re-aging us? Will it make us live longer as we take a digit off our age every birthday? No. The whole reason is far more mercenary. By classifying us like a two-tooth sheep, we will be classified according to our ability to retire or keep working. More plainly, they want us to keep working longer.
But that's not all they have for us. They also have decided that a good way of cutting costs of government would be to increase the number of work years used to calculate social security benefits. Yes, you heard right; just increase the years we all have to work before we can retire... 'and then index the number of years for improvements in life expectancy.'
So.. if our esteemed scientific community finds a cure for cancer tomorrow (even if it is way beyond the common man's budget) then the governement can 'index' your retirement because you've just been 'gifted' more lifespan and therefore you can work even longer - even if you can't afford the new added lifepan.
Does anyone know a tropical island I can emigrate to.. now? (Oh Yes! Climate change flood free please!)
No comments:
Post a Comment