Work until 70 - Poll added


A few people I know have this plan! I know a few who also think the veggie patch at the community garden would be enough :stuck_out_tongue:
I think for real sustainability you need some land. High density is presented as the green way but it wont be. Electric cars and telecommuting might change that view over time.

Don`t know if many could afford to buy two or if its even desirable for society for many people to purchase two as it drives down the home ownership rate on aggregate. Definitely agree on the battery pack though!

I really REALLY REALLY don’t want to be working at 70. I don’t really want to be working much past mid 60s, less if my health becomes anything like my fathers.

#702 … 58051.html


On another thread we’re discussing the destruction of jobs through Robots. On one hand we have the possibility of jobs being lost to Automation, and on the other hand a rising number of workers due to population increase and workers being required to work longer. Then the jobs that are being automated are office, paper-shuffling, retail and driving, the kind of jobs that would suit the older segment of the workforce. This is not going to end well.


The demographic cliff that is coming this century to nearly every country would be enough to ensure that the over committed welfare state cannot end well.
The automation issue just assures that this ending will be further expedited…


On the other hand the automation means that it will be quite possible for us to continue to provide everyone with a decent quality of living, if we choose to.

The question then becomes how do we tax efficiently, and how do we ensure that there is “fairness” (whatever that means) in how we distribute what is produced?

There are answers to this question - it’s not that we inevitably all starve - but it may be that they simply aren’t palatable to those in power.


If we didn’t have automation (and labour-augmentation/mechanisation), both at current levels and at levels expected, we’d really be in trouble. The demographic cliff would lead to starvation, and to a societal collapse. There’d be no way to square the circle. Forced euthanasia and cannibalism would not be unlikely!

But with automation and mechanisation, it starts to be likely that we *can *handle the demographic change. The productive capacity becomes sufficient to support a larger population with reduced labour force participation. The technology is there, it’s about policy and society.



Our 9-5, 5 day week etc mentally is a habit that will have to change. During the industrial revolution excess labour could be sent off to wars or colonization or hanged. Now the post industrial society needs a new structure that isn’t centred on the production line.


Keynes was saying in the 30s that by the 70’s if automation continued we’d be working 9 hour weeks, but the work week is still 40 hours per week and hasn’t budged since it was brought in. If anything it’s getting worse with all the unpaid hours now being worked by people getting work emails on their mobile.
Lessening the working week will be fought tooth and nail, sure in France, where they have 36hrs/wk they are rowing back.

If you could get to a 4 day flexi-week where you and your employer could arrange what 4 days out of 5 day workweek it would potentially allow a parent to be with their kids four days out of Seven from which Soceity could only benefit.


Exactly, Keynes was wrong about a lot and that prediction is no exception. The 70’s was a key period in the massive increase in the number of weekly working hours per family as more women joined the workforce.
I’m not convinced that technological progress typically equates to lower working hours in Western societies. With an oversupply of labour the main driver of working conditions that I can see is that workers need to compete to give the most value to their employer.
What are the drivers that would lead to a situation where an oversupply of labour would exist and that working hours would simultaneously become significantly less onerous?
In other words, what would be the mechanism whereby we could provide everyone with a decent quality of living and how would we choose it?


It hits me repeatedly how many don’t realise how good they’ve got it in Ireland compared to the rest of the world. During the bubble lots of people I know loaded up with debt they didn’t need.

Someone summarized on the Pin best summed it up back during the banking crisis; the minute it looked like the contagion was stopped and the panic started to subside, someone was already thinking “how do I make something out of this”.

Basically humans are pathologically insecure. A common solution to the reduction of working hours can only work if and when everyone is globally on the same page. It’s actually a huge step that it’s actually getting discussed at all.

What I’m also repeatedly struck by is how much “work” that we busy ourselves with isn’t actually required at all. I admit that for most of my life a lot of what I got paid to do just wasn’t essential and I can think of many other roles like that.

However I know the hours spent in voluntary and communities activities were definitely constructive and valuable but they just can’t be monetized.


Interesting Jon Rappoport article on this today, hard to summarise but takes in Buckminster Fuller and Mark Zuckerberg :smiley:


From my reading of that article the author is saying that we shouldn’t trust these guys as he believes that they’ll be using the Government to enforce their Utopian projects. But the Government are evil so therefore this will be evil. It doesn’t strike me as a polemic in favour of Anarchism so I’m not sure what he proposes to replace the “Government”.


I would have thought so too but reading history I’m reminded that Rome once granted free bread to all citizens.


OK, here’s how it is in reality.
Lots of OAPs are better off then ever.
But it’s not what they expected.
So they are living abstemiously, buying supermarket own brand product instead of the branded stuff.
So they can pump all their left over money into funding their grandchildren’s property, whether rented or bought.
The cycle of life


No state pensions you mean or will private ones be taxed out of existence aswell?


Retire at 70… … 30630.html

#717 … 08227.html


I would imagine that many companies still have a retirement age of 65 in the staff contracts, so retire them when they reach that age and tough shit about the gap year before the pension kicks in.


Yeah, Im mid 30s and starting to get repetitive strain injury in my mouse hand. I cant see myself doing this until 70. I also cant see how Id be much use then either. I work in statistics and coding. You need a sharp enough mind. A friend is a painter, slightly younger & fit but strained his shoulder. Healed up relatively quickly at this age. Wouldn’t fancy that in your 60s.
People slow down in body and mind, fact of life.

How many pinsters think they`d be ok working until late 60s or even 70?
How many could survive financially until pension pay day if they quit or were forcefully retired in their mid 60s?

Can you get social welfare payments if you have a property? What is the next step for the government to make if the money dries up because of increase social welfare payments?


Just think how the mouse feels !!! :-GC

I already retired at age 47. Five years later I’m still pursuing my neglected education which I may keep going with all the way to doctoral level. I’m not depending on staying sharp for career reasons, but I sure as hell hope not to fade away mentally for a while yet.

I saw Freeman Dyson interviewed a couple of years back and he was still sharp as a razor … he’s 93 now. He’s been at Princeton since Einstein’s time and is still professor emeritus. John Archibald Wheeler was also there and he kept going until age 97. He studied with Bohr, tutored Feynman and Thorne (who got the Nobel prize this week) and many other luminaries. Maybe it’s something in the water at Princeton :smiley: