Number of 100 Year Olds Will Grow 8 Fold in Next 35 Years

Wow means life expectancy will be rising a lot. Of course that's a good thing and I get that the number of centurions is rising all over the world. In the USA looks like Social Security eligible age will be increasing a lot and income level for paying in will rise a lot too. Saving for old age will be more important. Good luck trying to beat inflation by putting your money in a savings account. Also good luck pursuing a professional career until you are 80.

So how's about that guy from google who wants to live forever, Ray Kurzweil or whatever?

I'm curious how we're productive once we hook into the brain matrix, but if we've already got robots we can control with our brains then it shouldn't be too difficult.

thanks obama

Pew studies like this are conducted by people who baselessly assume growth is infinite ...

laughable premise yields laughable results

Interesting theory.

It's a rough estimate for general interest. There's no way to predict something like that.

world is gonna stink of piss soon

What can you infer from past and current data? It is more than clear that life expectancy in the developed world has been on the rise for a long time. Take cancer treatment for instance, compared to 35 years ago that rates of success in treating cancer have gone up a lot. What's to say that progress won't continue, maybe at an accelerated pace. Cancer treatment isn't the only area of medicine either that has made progress. I think it is safe to state that life expectancy will continue to rise, by how much it is hard to state but Pew is well respected and they make a decent case in my view.

I guess just the relentless onslaught of mainstream news and business articles indicating global economic contraction within 20 years.

The wonders of modern medical science owe their existence to decades of healthy growth and prosperity. That is quite obviously ending.

I suppose the ultra-wealthy may see increased vitality. But the masses won't.

The oldest man in the world today, is a Jew that survived the Holocaust.

Just thought that was interesting.

@Jiggs: Please link a couple of mainstream news and business articles indicating global economic contraction within 20 years.

mmkay ... but before I do, are you gonna quibble about what "indicate" means in this context? "mainstream" too, for that matter?

i mean, if you're gonna pretend only four or five news entities "count" like cornucopians always do, then we can dispense with that circus before it begins.

nanobots in our blood

I can't really predict what I'm going to quibble with until I see it. But yes, "indicate" is actually a word that means something, and it's stronger than "hint" or "suggest" or "entertain the possibility of". Now that you're hesitating, I have a feeling that I'll be quibbling about "mainstream" as well.

You made the claim about a "relentless onslaught of mainstream news and business articles". I'm just trying to figure out what that means to you since as far as I know I've never seen an article that matches that description. Now it sounds like you're scared you won't be able to come up with a single example that would satisfy a reasonable person like myself.

You've apparently reached a conclusion that growth and prosperity is "quite obviously ending". That seems like anything but mainstream (or obvious) to me. I mean, I think most people assume that the pace of technological advance, including medical technology, will almost certainly be higher in 20 years than it is now. Don't they? Why shouldn't they?

I can't even tell from reading the article how they arrived at it. Was it just modeling the graph based on historic data? Because 25 years of data isn't really enough to confidently forecast what will be happening 50 years down the line.

I have a feeling you will also. But then, that would probably still be the case if I had the Washington Post quoting Rex Tillerson of impending decline of world fossil fuel production. "So? That doesn't mean collapse, Jiggs! Nor does it mean Cheney did it!"

Oh, I have no doubt people like you have seen the articles. It's just that you can't concede they ultimately indicate an unsustainable global economy that is already grinding its gears. You recognize the symptoms, you just won't accept the diagnosis.

Just so we're clear, I have absolutely nothing to fear, ever, when facing cornucopians who reflexively label themselves 'reasonable.' That you can just repeat "I'm not satisfied" as many times as you need doesn't change the fact that any truly "reasonable" person couldn't possibly see the global economic climate as sustainable.

LOL. With Japan, Italy and Brazil teetering, U.S. banking giants' share prices down 70-90% in a decade, and the ECB balance sheet for money printing now over $3 trillion with no indication of a fix, how do you see this playing out in the mid-term? How are the tech giants? The oil and gas sector? Wage growth? Infrastructure spending? Climate progress?

Again, you can recognize symptoms, but you consider the diagnosis unthinkable. The Pope seems unwilling to lie to himself, so there's that.

There's one too many "assumes" in that sentence.

Anyhow, this is perhaps fit for another thread before I get some random threat from Elliott for perceived hijacking (it's not). I would create it, but knowing kerowo, it would probably be merged/deleted on general principle because Jiggs made it.

In any event, I have tons of links showing a terminally ill global economy (Business Insider, Seeking Alpha, etc.) ... Just this month, if you prefer, or we can go back a year or two. ... You know what they all have in common? The complete absence of anyone mentioning a solution.

25 years of data? What the **** are you thinking? Humans have been around for a lot longer than 25 years son. Sure be skeptical of a model but come on 25 years of data on human life expectancy, really?

1<= RELENTLESS < 2 ?????

I see that there is a fair amount of skepticism regarding the rate of advancement of medicine and medical technology continuing at its current pace. I wonder why. Seems like the advancement is accelerating to me.

So, no examples of the phenomenon you claim is relentless. Good job preemptively declaring that any objections to your conclusions aren't reasonable. And further good job preemptively dismissing all my objections before I've even had a chance to make any. Just forget I asked.

Uh huh... and good job ignoring the links and questions I did provide, "reasonable person."

Nothing that can't be solved by a huge world war.

Suppose the average lifespan in 1900 was 50. Suppose the average lifespan in 2030 is 100. Suppose the average productivity in 1900 is x. Suppose the average productivity in 2030 is 10x. Do the math! Also some of the lost productivity over the last 2 decades and be attributed to aging population, the rest is due to XXXXXXXXX.

LOL@"questions". I didn't ask for questions. And I didn't realize you meant for the links in your previous post to count as examples. Articles about economic problems in specific countries obviously don't have anything to do with a "global economic contraction". Also, your claim is that the coming global recession will be permanent ("growth and prosperity are over!"). Pointing at the current recession in Brazil (or anywhere else) as evidence of this is a bit silly, don't you think? Are you suggesting that Brazil will never come out of recession?

Which leaves us with your article about the Pope. I'm going to give you credit for that one ("The global economic system is near collapse, according to Pope Francis"). Although I think one could reasonably quibble about how much weight to give one man's opinion on the matter. In general I don't think "The Pope believes X" should be taken as a very strong indication that X is true.

Thanks for your input, I've got everything I need. I guess I remain an unreasonable "cornucopian".

I don't give a **** what you did and didn't ask for. If you don't have the capacity to defend the logical fallacies of your rather baseless assumptions, don't challenge.

Oh, wait, I'm sorry. Were you playing hard-ass detective to my detained suspect? You control the interrogation entirely? Should I ask for my lawyer?

LOL, classic.

That you would consider the situation in Brazil as a mere "recession" really sums up all I need to know about how wide the gap is between us. I'm sure you just hovered over the link and absorbed the headline and didn't read the story.

You would be more convincing if you didn't present your entire belief system 100% upon assumption. As if the notion that Brazil will just pull itself out of this death spiral doesn't need to be questioned. "It is known!" Oh.

What I "pointed to" were three examples, among many, showing the systemic deceleration of the global economy. In classic form, you pretend the three examples I linked to are all I have to support my claim, and then slink away from your own challenge. I haven't even begun to present my argument, and you're straw manning it and bailing out. It's as I expected.

Nuance, lost on another corn. That succeeded nicely.

As do I from you. ... It's beyond clear that you're just going to insist that any example I present - including the simultaneous meltdown of the 3rd, 8th and 9th largest economies in the world - are merely isolated events with no bearing on the interconnected global economy's fate, overall. To a market confidence broker like you, happy days are right around the corner, ... nevermind that you don't cite ANY examples of how that might be occurring, or when. It's just assumed.

You absolutely are, for the reason I just described above. You're the one who brought the challenge, and when I provide an opening statement in defense of my position, you avoid the crux entirely, distort my argument and announce your withdrawal. That's pretty cowardly, I gotta say.

Very well, then. Run along.

Do let us know when the IMF or World Bank ever again have to revise their growth forecast UPWARD for once, instead of downward every quarter. I'm sure the global banking system has a cure for why capitalism just can't seem to shake this 10-year cold. They just don't want to reveal it yet until they have to.