3 ms·
> Very few people can do 40 hours of physical labor when they get to be 65 years old I don't believe, from what I've seen, this to be remotely true. Most (not
by crispinb 7y ago
> Very few people can do 40 hours of physical labor when they get to be 65 years old
I don't believe, from what I've seen, this to be remotely true. Most (not al) of the tradies & labourers I know in their 60s and 70s are very clearly more physically capable than most (not all) office workers i know in their 30s. I guess that's my experience against yours, with neither worth much.
There's probably some real world data out there, though I suspect it would be incredibly geographically dependent. In my country (Aus) in little redneck towns like Bundaberg, you hardly see anyone in public who isn't obese, and they will largely be functionally disabled by the time they hit 50. OTOH middle-class hippies around my rural area are surfing, building houses, and running up and down hills at 80. Perhaps your perception of the capacities of older folk derives from living in disabling urban environments?
None of this bears much on the question of whether people should be mandated to work at jobs they don't choose into their 60s and 70s. I personally think the main fruit of increased productivity should be liberation as far as possible from meaningless & unchosen activity, for all.
- smallnamespace 7y ago> Most (not al) of the tradies & labourers I know in their 60s and 70s But surely, E(working capacity | is still day laborer and >65) > E(working capacity | >65)
- crispinb 7y agoI've no idea what E() means.
- barry-cotter 7y agoExpectation of being able to work as a day labourer given being over 65 is less than expectation of being able to work as a day labourer.
- crispinb 7y agoAh I see, thanks. In which case it's true if only by dint of tautology, but in any case isn't pertinent to the point at issue (whether "Very few" older folk can so work).
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]