I see that a veritable storm of hysteria is being whipped up by the media/state, as people have suddenly realised that we are living longer.
No bad thing surely? (Unless you are watching the current Torchwood series).
Well yes and no.
Whilst it is nice that we have moved on from the Victorian habit of dying in a our mid 40's, we have also realised that living to a grand old age brings with it a number of problems eg:
- infirmity
- mental decline
- lack of respect from others
- loneliness etc etc
Whilst some of these issues can be resolved by families and neighbours being a little more interactive with those who are elderly, other issues (such as severe mental and physical decline) require professional help/intervention (whether that is day care at home, or more hands on treatment in a hospital/care home).
These interventions come at a cost, the older we live the more of us will need longer and more expensive professional help.
The state/media have now realised (Doh!) that as we live longer (around 30% of people born now will live to 100) it will cost more to look after us.
"Small problem", we can't afford it!
Estimates being bandied around, are that those who live to 100 in the future will spend around 60 of those years receiving state benefits (in one form or another).
No matter what positive changes we might make to society's attitudes to the elderly, and no matter how much more families actually help their elderly relatives, living to a "ripe old age" looks to be a pretty unpleasant prospect as we will end up having to entrust what remains of our bodies and minds to Nanny (a Nanny that is broke).
The irony in all of this is that Nanny keeps lecturing the "young" about their eating, drinking, smoking, exercise and drug taking habits.
For why?
In order that they may live longer!
A cost benefit analysis will show (I guarantee this) that it would be far better (for the state, and our quality of lives) if we drop dead of alcohol/food/substance abuse in our 50's/60's rather than live on in dreary boredom, neglect, squalor and abuse until we are 100.
Mark my words, Nanny will one day start to encourage us to smoke fags, take drugs and (if necessary) pop a suicide pill.
As my late uncles once said:
Getting old sucks!
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
And put the pension age to where it used to be - the average age of death. It was supposed to be an assurance scheme for those who lived a bit too long past the end of their working life. Now with health being better for the majority of older people, there is no physical or mental reason to stop working at 60 or whatever it is this year. It should be put up to 80 or so pretty quickly. Retirement is seen by those working as something to look forward to - but with small pensions that the majority get (because they live so long in retirement) it is actually hell.
ReplyDeleteI get really angry when I read things as written by Sad But Mad Lad.....Hello; there is more to life than bloody work....If work is all one has in their life, then a sad life is what you have.
ReplyDeleteWhether we live longer or not, the fundamental problem is that the state's pension scheme is a giant ponzi scheme. The money I put in whilst working was spent on giving pensioners their pension, now I need my pension, so my money has gone and I rely on people that work now to provide funds for my pension payments.
During good times, nanny needs to work hard to actually create a surplus to put into a fund that covers pension payments, in much the same way as private pension funds do; of course, Gormless Brown selling our nation's gold at a knock down price didn't help and he destroyed our private pensions by robbing them thus depriving many ordinary people of a reasonable pension.
When we started to pay SERPS, we were told that there would be more than enough pension for us all to live on and enjoy a good standard of living during our retirement years, sadly successive governments have renaged on their promise.
Imagine if a private pension scheme unilaterally declared that everyone would have to work up to seven extra years, pay more and then upon retirement, recieve less; well that's what Nanny has done.
When you reach sixty, you have had enough of the "world of work" and can't wait to reap the reward of your pensions, imagine if you still had another twenty years working ahead of you.
I suppose those sad people that want to carry on working until they drop have nice easy desk jobs but, what about those that lay bricks for example, will they want to be out in all weathers suffering from age related problems; do you really want a seventy nine year old to drive the school bus.....There are only so many opportunites at B&Q and openings for Car Park wardens.
The fundamental problem is that the UK is badly run and far too much of the money Nanny robs us of is wasted; its the socialist's way. Live to work, taxed till death.
Nanny would like us to start work at ten years old and work until we're eighty and die ten minutes before our final shift ends; I bet she would clock us off before we hit the floor just to avoid paying us for that last ten minutes.
If my generation had stayed in work beyond a reasonable retirement age, where would the jobs for the next generation be coming from?
Whilst I accept that many people do want to work beyond the normal retirement age, I fear that once it has been aceppted that people may work on if they choose to, it won't be too long before it becomes compulsory......Remember everyone will, at some point, become old and your attitudes may well be different to those you hold now.
It has been said that a society can be judged by how well it takes care of and treats it's elderly and sick members well, on that basis our society is not too great.
I have always worked but, I considered it the curse of being born poor!!
Very well put, Tonk! I am sick to the back teeth of current attitudes towards the elderly which, simply put, seems to be
ReplyDelete"How dare you live beyond 65, and how dare you expect to enjoy your retirement!" The problem is NOT that people are living longer, which is NOT a bad thing, by the way, but as you stated, Tonk, it is Gormless Gordon and other politicians who have cocked things up bigtime. Neither are things helped by the fact that the last government signed us up to a deal which means we have to contribute to bailing out every basketcase economy in Europe, whilst this government have increased overseas aid by 37% whilst public services we all rely on are being slashed left, right and centre! Needless to say, those who have done these things, far from having to pay for it, are doing 'very nicely thank you'!
Tonk, you asked "If my generation had stayed in work beyond a reasonable retirement age, where would the jobs for the next generation be coming from?"
There would (obviously) be no jobs for them, especially the way our politicians betray their own people e.g the Bombadier train workers over the new contyract for 'Thameslink'.
You also commented, "Whilst I accept that many people do want to work beyond the normal retirement age, I fear that once it has been aceppted that people may work on if they choose to, it won't be too long before it becomes compulsory......Remember everyone will, at some point, become old and your attitudes may well be different to those you hold now."
This reminds me of 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell. In the story, at one point the pigs (masters) decree that work is to be introduced on Sunday afternoons. They stated that this work would be 'strictly voluntary, but any animal (worker) absenting him or herself from it would have his rations reduced by half.' I fear, as you suggest, we are seeing the thin end of the wedge. Those who fought in two world wars for this country must be aghast at what has happened, especially the lack of respect for the elderly, and those who died must be spinning in their graves! What happened to the promise 'a country fit for heroes'? Another betrayal and broken promise methinks.
sic transit gloria!
My Lord,
ReplyDeleteA friend of Mrs Tonk's worked in a major supermarket for a couple of decades or so, she too is now retired. It was decided by Nanny to allow the bigger supermarkets to open on a Sunday.
The government and the supermarkets tried to reassure the staff by saying that no one would be made to work on a Sunday and that it would be entirely voluntary.
A decade or so on, it is impossible to be employed by a major supermarket without contracting to work on Sunday.
It is fair to say that we have all been conned over many years:(
ReplyDeleteTonk said: "The government and the supermarkets tried to reassure the staff by saying that no one would be made to work on a Sunday and that it would be entirely voluntary. A decade or so on, it is impossible to be employed by a major supermarket without contracting to work on Sunday."
ReplyDeleteI am no friend of the humanrights act, in fact I consider it to be an abomination. However, it would be very interesting if a practicing Christian, or member of another religious organisation, were to mount a legal challenge to this policy, claiming religious discrimination under the act. It wouldn't surprise me if, by doing this, they would open a whole can of worms for Nanny!