3 ms·
The data also ignores the fact that walking leads to a healthier lifestyle which means living longer, which is more costly than not living longer.
by rezashirazian 10y ago
The data also ignores the fact that walking leads to a healthier lifestyle which means living longer, which is more costly than not living longer.
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y agoYes, and one should also account for the reduced tax burden of dying younger.
- jogjayr 10y agoBut then you also have to account for the reduced earning potential due to dying younger :P
- Nullabillity 10y agoNot really. If you die at 70 rather than 90 then your total earnings were probably pretty much the same.
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y agoIn Australia those additional 20 years on the current full rate pension for a single person represent an additional AU$454,428.00 of income[1]. 1. The full rate includes the supplements for a total of $873.90 per fortnight for a single person as per https://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/age-pension https://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelin...
- jogjayr 10y agoNot necessarily. If returns from your retirement savings exceed your outgoings then you're maintaining net positive income till the day you die. Granted as things stand, this case would not represent the majority of people.