Will never understand why rich and successful people continue to work when they no longer need to from a financial standpoint. But that's also probably why I'll never be rich and successful.
Yep. Same reason why all the execs fought to get back into the office while the overwhelming majority prefers to stay home. Ego doesn't get stroked on zoom like it does when you call people into your corner office with a view and/or strut down the halls in your power suit.
I think an underrated reason Biden, Pelosi, McConnell, etc. don’t want to quit is that when they retire they’ll have nothing to do and will probably die or deteriorate faster. They’re literally working to live at this point.
I think it's a combo of that, multiplied by it also being a larger generation. Today there are 4 million 45 year olds, and 3 million 75 year olds. In 1999 those numbers were 4.2 million 45 year olds ad 1.6 million 75 year olds. Some of the is mortality but a lot of it is birth rates rising and falling at different times.
But speaking to the 80+ year olds, specifically, those guys were actually kind of a smaller generation (WW2 and late depression) than the boomers who boomed from 1946 on. So they may have had a big advantage early in life, stepping into management roles while there were still plenty of gaps and ready to manage large teams of persons just a few years younger than themselves
Yeah my grandparents died at ~91 and passed their house and their meagre but real wealth onto...their three daughters who were all ~60 and two of whom (the successful ones) had already semi-retired. At least my mother, who has always been poor/struggling, desperately needed the money.
Meanwhile the six grandkids (and 10 great-grandkids), all of whom could have much more used the money (it is a mixed bag in terms of success with the two oldest of us doing best and in the upper middle class), got basically trinkets, and look to be maybe even in our 60s before that generation dies.
Its interesting to think about the societal implications if this trend continues. Particularly if/when we make progress on anti-aging research, which according to some experts is 5 to 10 years away before we start seeing some actual treatments. See for example this recent review article
I think there might be a natural corrective coming for the whole "50 year old kids inheriting" phenomenon: the fact that the average age that people are having kids has gone up. If your parents had you at age 25 and then live to be 75, yeah, you don't inherit until you are 50 years old. But if your parents have you at age 35 and then live to be 75, now you are inheriting at age 40. That's a huge different in terms of life stage
I think Trump's VP Pick of JD Vance was initially a bold stroke, given his youth contrasted so well with Biden's age. I have friends who lean Trump who are like "man, I wish Trump could take that pick back". This is even before the news came out with Vance on this moral high-horse about those who have kids should have more say in America's elections and other weird attacks on Harris not being a mother who birthed children.
Ethan has a good point, even though the Boomer's power is slowly trickling away, it's going to eventually happen all at once. We are already starting to feel the re-ordering of society, whether we realize this or not.
Will never understand why rich and successful people continue to work when they no longer need to from a financial standpoint. But that's also probably why I'll never be rich and successful.
I guess it's just power and status. They're so addicted to it they can't let it go.
Yep. Same reason why all the execs fought to get back into the office while the overwhelming majority prefers to stay home. Ego doesn't get stroked on zoom like it does when you call people into your corner office with a view and/or strut down the halls in your power suit.
Or managing / leading / building trust with an office of remote workers you can hardly see is less efficient than interacting with them face to face.
Good point! But we don't need 5x a week to do that. 2x or 3 max should suffice.
I imagine some older people who do not need the money find satisfaction and purpose in the work.
I think an underrated reason Biden, Pelosi, McConnell, etc. don’t want to quit is that when they retire they’ll have nothing to do and will probably die or deteriorate faster. They’re literally working to live at this point.
Biden/Pelosi etc. aren't even boomers, too old for that.
Is this only happening because this is the first generation to live long enough and be healthy enough to be in power at such an old age?
I think it's a combo of that, multiplied by it also being a larger generation. Today there are 4 million 45 year olds, and 3 million 75 year olds. In 1999 those numbers were 4.2 million 45 year olds ad 1.6 million 75 year olds. Some of the is mortality but a lot of it is birth rates rising and falling at different times.
But speaking to the 80+ year olds, specifically, those guys were actually kind of a smaller generation (WW2 and late depression) than the boomers who boomed from 1946 on. So they may have had a big advantage early in life, stepping into management roles while there were still plenty of gaps and ready to manage large teams of persons just a few years younger than themselves
re: old people giving money to their 50 yo kids -- this book Die with Zero is good on that topic. probably read the summary to be honest: https://aliabdaal.com/book-notes/die-with-zero/
Yeah my grandparents died at ~91 and passed their house and their meagre but real wealth onto...their three daughters who were all ~60 and two of whom (the successful ones) had already semi-retired. At least my mother, who has always been poor/struggling, desperately needed the money.
Meanwhile the six grandkids (and 10 great-grandkids), all of whom could have much more used the money (it is a mixed bag in terms of success with the two oldest of us doing best and in the upper middle class), got basically trinkets, and look to be maybe even in our 60s before that generation dies.
Its interesting to think about the societal implications if this trend continues. Particularly if/when we make progress on anti-aging research, which according to some experts is 5 to 10 years away before we start seeing some actual treatments. See for example this recent review article
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2024/05/science-is-making-anti-aging-progress-but-do-we-want-to-live-forever/
is it a recipe for a stagnant society? thousands of years of rule by a worm emperor? food for thought
Nice reference!
I think there might be a natural corrective coming for the whole "50 year old kids inheriting" phenomenon: the fact that the average age that people are having kids has gone up. If your parents had you at age 25 and then live to be 75, yeah, you don't inherit until you are 50 years old. But if your parents have you at age 35 and then live to be 75, now you are inheriting at age 40. That's a huge different in terms of life stage
I think Trump's VP Pick of JD Vance was initially a bold stroke, given his youth contrasted so well with Biden's age. I have friends who lean Trump who are like "man, I wish Trump could take that pick back". This is even before the news came out with Vance on this moral high-horse about those who have kids should have more say in America's elections and other weird attacks on Harris not being a mother who birthed children.
Ethan has a good point, even though the Boomer's power is slowly trickling away, it's going to eventually happen all at once. We are already starting to feel the re-ordering of society, whether we realize this or not.
I would be very interested to hear a historian find precedents for this phenomenon.
All good points that you may soon revisit with Team USA.