9 ms·
As Gen X and Boomers Age, They Confront Living Alone
- RosanaAnaDana 4y agoWe need a version of hackernews that dismisses paywalled/ adwalled/ crap walled content.
- slang800 4y agoI'd be happy with a browser extension that replaces all the paywalled links on HN with archive links.
- johnea 4y agoThe new york times is easily read by disabling all javascript and cookies...
- johnea 4y agoWhich is really the way you should surf the intertubes anyway. Do you just enjoy being a (lonely) data harvesting resource?
- D13Fd 4y agoDo you really "disable all javascript"?
- RosanaAnaDana 4y agoI think the broader point is to prevent them from getting in front of eyeballs in the first place. If a view of hackernews is available where paywalled content can't make it to the top, this puts the onus on people promoting paywalls to change their behavior.
- pessimizer 4y ago> this puts the onus on people promoting paywalls to change their behavior. The amount of onus this delivers has to be calculated using infinitesimals. Especially compared to the amount of money delivered by paying subscribers.
- mellosouls 4y agoIt would also be nice if the original submitter (especially frequent ones, who should know better, tho this isn't aimed at anybody in particular including the op) make the effort to post a non-paywalled link at the same time in the first comment rather than the "hit-and-run" approach of many of them. Or if it's a common news story then post from another site instead.
- shagie 4y agoGift link: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/27/us/living-alone-aging.html?unlocked_article_code=F4hTQUzAdG15g7Rz4zWZfDRr_bAMZf8qTvrn-uoMz4gcCSP5mkCLsXpNfqVP0TKdeP_BDQx1pCXo-QSzY9pIbzSBq_Rrk6jvLd1GZlW5dUr08vIiKQ7OFaTr1A8q-0y4DPvGJnH8D7gULm07ulP-GIZI_djJI7gphrMgYJQaPG1tUT-6p9LPYGHvhpsk5MlKMvKsjqZZVpuYun1WdhcyO9T0wi7Hc2OExF0W58blkzd0x4uay-OLF9wtgO6Z8fw7fPBIyhX8vDabGOpRF0njl9Pa-szLc0kAZs1otVapmk9Y-vUMsDSEFIa6nGjHk69LavzGTdqACw&smid=share-url https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/27/us/living-alone-aging.htm...
- gala8y 4y agoThanks
- slang800 4y agohttps://archive.ph/SxVta https://archive.ph/SxVta
- johnea 4y ago
- _trackno5 4y agoheh, it sounds funny when you put it that way, but some people legitimately have a hard time socialising and forming deep connections with others. Doubt it's a new thing, but maybe it gets exacerbated nowadays with everyone being online all the time.
- jleyank 4y agoMust be an extrovert. It’s easy to be lonely in a crowd and in fact the crowd having strong interactions can drive it home. Different strokes, eh. Be empathetic with those unlike yourself.
- slang800 4y agoIt's hard to be sympathetic when these boomers choose to be alone, not marry, and not have kids. What did they think was going to happen when they got old?
- woofyman 4y agoSpouses die. Children move away.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- wwweston 4y agoNot nearly as pathetic as assuming that the 8 billion are (a) essentially fungible from a relationship standpoint (b) equally eager to engage in a relationship with anyone who likes (c) within reasonable proximity and that's just a start of the assumptions you probably didn't even do enough thinking to know that you thoughtlessly made. On the plus side, coming in hot with a low-value comment frosted with general contempt for an entire class of people does narrow down where in the 8 billion people someone might look for rewarding companionship by at least a value of one, or provide you with the opportunity to bask in the kind of disagreeable engagement and connection you seem to have indicated you prefer, so I guess that's kindof nice.
- mahathu 4y ago> That shift presents issues on housing, health care and personal finance. I wonder why it leaves out the adverse effects on mental health of living alone, which are arguably the worst of the bunch.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoFrom the piece: > But while many people in their 50s and 60s thrive living solo, research is unequivocal that people aging alone experience worse physical and mental health outcomes and shorter life spans.
- dash2 4y agoI'll try out an extreme point of view here. Modern culture has failed, we need to replace it. One third of 50 year olds living alone is as good a symptom as any. You could mention the birth rate also. The two are obviously connected. Am I right? Is that too nuts? I just don't see how this ends well. We have effectively socialized old age care, and now we are expecting future generations, an ever-shrinking group, to pay for the pensions of people they have never met.
- la64710 4y agoYou have to make a small distinction between groups that are alone and unhappy AND groups that are alone to be happy. To each his own I say.
- dash2 4y agoSure. Are most people single in their 50s by choice, as in they would prefer that to being in a relationship with children? I doubt it. Even if they are, if they're relying on being supported by the next generation, that is still leaning on outsiders, and the outcome may be quite disappointing.
- la64710 4y agoNothing happens without reason and some of those reasons maybe due to choices made earlier in life. Take responsibility for those choices , and most importantly if someone is feeling lonely please consider to wholeheartedly getting involved in volunteering and helping others. It is not a replacement for a relationship but it opens doors to human connections. Life is impermanent , we come alone and go alone , whatever time you find in this planet try whatever ways you can connect to others.
- Dracophoenix 4y ago> Are most people single in their 50s by choice, as in they would prefer that to being in a relationship with children? Firstly, There have always been — though I dislike the term — leftover men and women recluses and spinsters. People don't exist as sperm donors and incubators whose only purpose to form a family unit. They have rich lives as individuals. Secondly, the question to ask would be a choice at what cost? I'm sure any naif would answer affirmatively to having a relationship with children. But those who are aware of what the question implies — the surrender of opportunity and free time, the fiduciary duty to spouse and child, the peer pressure and stress from society from without and one's SO from within, the potential for everything to fall apart at one's expense even when doing everything right — will rightfully be more uncertain about whether such a relationship is worth pursuing. No one in this universe has a choice as to someone else's behaviors, and, as a result, the only "reliable" metrics are semi-controllable tradeoffs (i.e. freedom vs loneliness, financial security vs fiduciary obligation) and an ability to judge character. > I doubt it. Even if they are, if they're relying on being supported by the next generation, that is still leaning on outsiders, and the outcome may be quite disappointing. What's the difference? Most people on Earth don't become their parents' geriatric specialists. You'll be depending on outsiders whether or not you have children. In fact, kids especially rely on outsiders to comfort of them, feed them, medicate them, make cheap products for them, teach them, and transport them, for about two decades. And by that point they'll have their own lives with their own demands.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- aliqot 4y agoDevils advocate for the sake of debate: We're breaking a lot of relationship norms in the recent generations, why shouldn't being married in a nuclear arrangement be one of those?
- hn_throwaway_99 4y agoBut you aren't really advocating for anything. "Breaking a lot of norms recently" isn't really an argument, unless you have some specific argument for why lots of elderly people living alone is a good thing.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- shortcake27 4y agoIt’s very common for the older generation to persist in toxic relationships, because a) “till death do us part” and b) anyone who didn’t want a nuclear family was “not normal”. Modern generations are realising they don’t need to live a life they don’t enjoy, which leads to more isolation. I would rather live alone than live in a bad relationship. Not saying this is the sole cause, but it would definitely be a factor.
- taylodl 4y agoThat’s a false dichotomy. The choice isn’t loneliness or enduring a bad relationship. You don’t even have to be married to live with someone.
- jasmer 4y agoThat norm is definitely mostly broken. While I suppose we should always question old norms, we probably should apply at least as much scrutiny to new ideals as well. Despite some gains here and there (and some of it irretrievably important), I don't think we've really figured it out on the social front at all, and we're losing almost as much as we are gaining.
- WBrentWilliams 4y agoI look at this issue and see a market failure. Maybe it is not corporately profitable to provide the pile of services that a population aging in place need (welfare checks, transportation, food, housing...) but it should be possible to build the infrastructure to create the raft out of parts of a solution. Maybe a mix of formal (paid-for) and informal (volunteer, value-add) services. I see this as a necessity for people that do not at the moment face this "cliff". After all, spouses die, children leave and/or live far away. Any person in a stable situation at the moment could easily find themselves in need of these services.
- EasyTiger_ 4y agoWhy does US media seem to get a stiffy out of others' despair?
- 35amxn35 4y agoIt's because they do. The NYT loathes the average American. They get a hard-on when talking about 'deaths of dispair' in 'flyover countries'. Makes sense considering who owns it.
- riotnrrd 4y agoOh, please. This is such a dismissive, bad faith statement it should be deleted. Nobody at the NYT "loathes" the "average" American. They do not get sexually aroused when reporting tragedy. Be a better person.
- 35amxn35 4y ago>disagrees with opinion >wants it deleted Why don't you simply downvote or say "I disagree"? Is this the common trait of the NYT reader?
- tsol 4y agoIMO it's simply because it gets clicks. People love to see the issues they care about being featured, and this is a issue that is important to a lot of people.
- nitwit005 4y agoIt's hardly just the US media. It got shared, it got up votes, people are discussing it. The results speak for themselves.
- throwaway128128 4y agoDenmark's got a great solution: https://journal.theaou.org/news-and-reviews/the-popularity-of-cohousing-in-demark/ https://journal.theaou.org/news-and-reviews/the-popularity-o... Too bad such a thing would be deemed "socialist" in the US.
- 35amxn35 4y agoWtf? Why would "co-housing" be deemed socialist? Is sharing an appartment with roommates deemed socialist in the US? Is couchsurfing?
- poulsbohemian 4y agoWe have a lot of friends / acquaintances in their 60s and 70s, especially women, who live alone. We've surmised they should all start a meal club. As in, none of them like to cook for one, but if they each took one night per week to cook for the "team" it would be easier on all of them. Co-living and/or support networks make a lot of sense for various demographics.
- gruez 4y ago>Denmark's got a great solution What's the solution? I skimmed the article and I'm left confused as to what exactly "co-housing" entails. Is it just a college dorm situation where multiple people live in one building with separate rooms and shared common areas? >Too bad such a thing would be deemed "socialist" in the US. I hate statements like these with a vengeance because: 1. it instills a defeatist attitude that we will never be able to get the change we want because of opponents 2. it asserts without evidence that the opponents are cartoonishly evil/ignorant
- nytesky 4y agoMy spouse and I have talked about if one of us dies after we empty the nest, we want to Golden Girls setup with fellow retiree roommates. Wonder why that died out?
- hall0ween 4y agoI reason it’s because culturally we don’t include friendship as important when making life decisions (career, living situations, child reading, etc.). We live in increasingly small units.