• Adramis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I could be wrong, but I think the point that @weeeeum was making is that by the point you retire, your body and mind are so wrecked from having been overworked for 30+ years that ‘just go outside’ is an agonizing prospect. Yeah, if you make it to that point and can still go outside and do fun stuff then great. But if you retire at 65, are male, and American, then you’re retiring at the average healthy life expectancy for your group and on average have about a decade of declining health to ‘look forward to’. Chart

    • weeeeum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yes, this is what I meant exactly. My mom has the aforementioned chronic pain from working 60 a week for like 20 years, and my dad had a stroke, partial blindness and high blood pressure after being so stressed at his work. My grandpa is nearly deaf from his time on an aircraft carrier in the Navy to get his GI bill. My great uncle died from asbestos exposure (from the Navy), for his GI bill and never saw retirement at all. Everyone aspired to retire early with tons of cash but ended up ruining their bodies or outright dying.

      Instead of looking for a cutoff point to “finally live life”, we should work comfortably and progressively easier as we age, mind and body intact.

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      A lot of that can be attributed to poor lifestyle choices as well, like smoking, alcohol, drugs, or inactive lifestyles. Some of that can certainly be attributed to too much work, poor conditions and low wages, but humans can certainly be healthy past 65.

      And even if people are too sick to enjoy themselves past 65, I don’t see how working longer is better than retiring in that state which is what the article ultimately wants.