4 ms·
Death can often be a very slow process. Sometimes it will cause a worker (and the worker's company) to be less efficient due to health-related issues. Not to m
by csa 9y ago
Death can often be a very slow process.
Sometimes it will cause a worker (and the worker's company) to be less efficient due to health-related issues. Not to mention that caregivers (e.g., family) may also be less efficient by taking time off from work or quitting work all together.
Sometimes people will be put on disability for health reasons before they should need to retire. This is a drag on the welfare system and (often) the economy if they had been a productive member of the workforce.
There is also a potential quality of life issue (both present and expected), but that's not as easy to measure as the previous points. It also has some potentially complex implications that are beyond the scope of this post.
- Zyst 9y agoWhat would be a better scenario, though. Do we not die slowly even if we are older, which also requires more caretaking? What's the difference between having it happen early and late? I do agree with the Quality of life issue, though. If I'm a highly skilled worker (And thus have prospects to migrate) And some people in say, a country in Europe, live to see 150 years of age, while in my country on average people live to 70 I'm moving out as soon as humanly possible. Realistically the gap doesn't grow that large, but I'm using hyperbole to make a point. I might be too dumb to articulate it though.
- csa 9y agoThe issue in the quote is (premature?) death as it relates to economic competitiveness. That is why early -- that is, in working years -- matters more than late. Late and slow death has its own indirect impact on economic competitiveness, but that is not the focus of the quote, imho.