3 ms·

100-year-olds say working beyond retirement age is what keeps them going

5 points by rntn 2y ago

nullindividual 2y ago
An article, from a business-focused media group, which identifies for a specific biased point, ignoring those who are >=100 and not working. Is this a propaganda piece to tell the rubes why Social Security won't be necessary?
- willnonya 2y ago
  It seems more likely that the rubes are the ones who fail to grasp the value of work in ones life.
  - nullindividual 2y ago
    If the article could only provide a balanced view of that. Instead, the article is hammering home a specific viewpoint designed to manipulate it's audience into believing working is required for a long life, which for those who live that long, is generally not the case.
    - fuzzfactor 2y ago
      It does seem like an unrealistically optimistic point of view for most people, and these are all centenarians who seem to have worked for unbroken decades on end. You would expect a great deal of similarity in their testimonies, but it also might never be possible to be more than halfway similar to people who have only worked half as many decades. Halfway there could get your attention though. And if you're actually accomplishing something why would you want to quit?
bell-cot 2y ago
I've heard anecdotes about active-over-100 cigar smokers crediting their good health to the cigars. Ditto with whiskey drinkers. Ditto monks still doing the full daily routine of arising at 5am, praying for an hour, taking communion, etc, etc. Other than "because emotions", is there any reason to suspect that healthy-over-100 people would have some special insight into why they are so far to the right edge of the bell curve? You could also ask mothers of L<=>R -switched babies ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situs_inversus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situs_inversus ) what they did, to cause that to happen. (Yes, I'm well aware that lacking daily routines, positive social interaction, purpose to life, etc. can be quite bad for one's health. And "gotta work!" can check many of those boxes.)

5 points by rntn 2y ago

An article, from a business-focused media group, which identifies for a specific biased point, ignoring those who are >=100 and not working. Is this a propaganda piece to tell the rubes why Social Security won't be necessary?

willnonya 2y ago
It seems more likely that the rubes are the ones who fail to grasp the value of work in ones life.
- nullindividual 2y ago
  If the article could only provide a balanced view of that. Instead, the article is hammering home a specific viewpoint designed to manipulate it's audience into believing working is required for a long life, which for those who live that long, is generally not the case.
  - fuzzfactor 2y ago
    It does seem like an unrealistically optimistic point of view for most people, and these are all centenarians who seem to have worked for unbroken decades on end. You would expect a great deal of similarity in their testimonies, but it also might never be possible to be more than halfway similar to people who have only worked half as many decades. Halfway there could get your attention though. And if you're actually accomplishing something why would you want to quit?

bell-cot 2y ago

I've heard anecdotes about active-over-100 cigar smokers crediting their good health to the cigars. Ditto with whiskey drinkers. Ditto monks still doing the full daily routine of arising at 5am, praying for an hour, taking communion, etc, etc. Other than "because emotions", is there any reason to suspect that healthy-over-100 people would have some special insight into why they are so far to the right edge of the bell curve? You could also ask mothers of L<=>R -switched babies ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situs_inversus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situs_inversus ) what they did, to cause that to happen. (Yes, I'm well aware that lacking daily routines, positive social interaction, purpose to life, etc. can be quite bad for one's health. And "gotta work!" can check many of those boxes.)