When will the average life expectancy reach its max?

Originally Posted by beeemerdude

I think by age 60, I would have pretty much done it all in life. Hookers & blow, driven fast cars, etc.

Life, I would assume, would get pretty boring after 65 or so....like what duz one look forward to ? Their morning crunch? Going to the hearing aid store for new batteries? F it. Who wants to live beyond 90yrs of age after centering their attentions on the previous 10-15yrs on bowel movements? At age 65-70,........I think I'd rather plunge over a mountain road barrier at 120 km/per/hr & be hurled 500 meters downwards & die in a spectacular fiery car crash .

(Bipolar moment done. Will take my medication now.)


EDIT: above scenario only if my dick forever goes limp & Viagra doesn't work, as I could see myself being a horny, grumpy, drunken zot 85 yr old man, chasing all the hotty caretaker nurses at the "home".

I'd insert that you are full of sh!t! I'm closer to 70 than to 60, and I'm having a blast. All my stuff is paid for and I draw 3 pensions plus the Social Security check, and the income from my investments, so money is not a problem. I have all the freedom and free time that I can handle. I'd bet that you would have a tough time keeping up with my ass. Yep, time for your meds.

Both Grandfathers lived to be 96 and were still very active. One Aunt is now 103 and still cuts her own grass. She'll give you a racehorse cussing if you even offer to do it. Chronological age is just that. I know what I'm gonna be when I grow up...........98.

Originally Posted by Stickbuilder

I'd insert that you are full of sh!t! I'm closer to 70 than to 60, and I'm having a blast. All my stuff is paid for and I draw 3 pensions plus the Social Security check, and the income from my investments, so money is not a problem. I have all the freedom and free time that I can handle. I'd bet that you would have a tough time keeping up with my ass. Yep, time for your meds.

Both Grandfathers lived to be 96 and were still very active. One Aunt is now 103 and still cuts her own grass. She'll give you a racehorse cussing if you even offer to do it. Chronological age is just that. I know what I'm gonna be when I grow up...........98.

Originally Posted by HiHoBrian

It won't be forced. You would sign up for it. And probably pay money for it. Like you pay to have a licence to drive on public roads,but you can't just drive as fast as you want,or get a phone data plan that has a limit unlike previous unlimited plans from the past-for the common good of all people. You could pay for two life spans of living,but be allowed one life span of offspring-for the same common good of all people.

um... driving and phone usage are a completely different realm from having children. Both of them include using public facilities that you have to use.

And what if I double my lifespan, but then decide it's unfulfilling and want kids instead when I'm, say, 150 years old and feeling like I'm 35? Am I just SOL?

Why is it the common good to keep some people alive for a long time, while denying the chance for a next generation? Are there going to be quotas for how many people are allowed to sign up for this? Because obviously, if 75% of the population decides to expand their life, then we're going to face a severe population shrinkage.

And what if I've already had two children? Am I exempt from participating?

Bottom line, I think the problems that need to be solved first are in getting ourselves new places to expand to, before we worry about our terribly short lifetimes.

Originally Posted by Stickbuilder

I'd insert that you are full of sh!t! I'm closer to 70 than to 60, and I'm having a blast. All my stuff is paid for and I draw 3 pensions plus the Social Security check, and the income from my investments, so money is not a problem. I have all the freedom and free time that I can handle. I'd bet that you would have a tough time keeping up with my ass. Yep, time for your meds.

Both Grandfathers lived to be 96 and were still very active. One Aunt is now 103 and still cuts her own grass. She'll give you a racehorse cussing if you even offer to do it. Chronological age is just that. I know what I'm gonna be when I grow up...........98.

here is a case in point.

If this fanatic lives to be 200... that's 130 more years of three pensions and a social security check for him to draw. That's going to make any pension, plus social security, tap out when 100 becomes the new 50.

Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer

here is a case in point.

If this fanatic lives to be 200... that's 130 more years of three pensions and a social security check for him to draw. That's going to make any pension, plus social security, tap out when 100 becomes the new 50.

You missed the entire point. I could easily give up the Social Security check and my Military pension. My privately funded pensions and investments will easily fund my life. Your argument has no basis in fact.

Originally Posted by Stickbuilder

You missed the entire point. I could easily give up the Social Security check and my Military pension. My privately funded pensions and investments will easily fund my life. Your argument has no basis in fact.

I'm just saying, get ready to go back to work if you want to live to 200.

Pensions will not be collected by measly 60 year olds anymore. You'll no longer be working for 20,30,40 years, but more like 140 years before you can retire. Especially when we limit the number of children you can have (limiting the number of people paying into your military pension fund, social security, and your private pensions).

The first, long lived people will be those who can afford it. Be that from genetic engineering, purchased familial stock, or some kind of controlled living conditions. All of the things in our environment serve to age us, including extremes in temperature, quality of air breathed, and our way of life. That's a lot of moving pieces that must be controlled in order to maximize how long we will live. So, think of the first person to make it to 150 being a test tube baby and adult living in a really sheltered life. It's the only way I can see it done.

But as humans, we still focus medical care and health on treatment too often, and not on prevention.

Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer

I'm just saying, get ready to go back to work if you want to live to 200.

Pensions will not be collected by measly 60 year olds anymore. You'll no longer be working for 20,30,40 years, but more like 140 years before you can retire. Especially when we limit the number of children you can have (limiting the number of people paying into your military pension fund, social security, and your private pensions).

completely agree.

If the data on the website is correct, and we continue to follow the trend, I will die on June 1, 2070 at the age of 84.

interesting forecast chart, it shows that the US average will take about 3 more centuries to reach the life expectancy of japan today

Originally Posted by ashpelham

But as Americans, we still focus medical care and health on treatment too often, and not on prevention.

Fixed. And yes, that's a huge part of the problem.

Originally Posted by HiHoBrian

It won't be forced. You would sign up for it. And probably pay money for it. Like you pay to have a licence to drive on public roads,but you can't just drive as fast as you want,or get a phone data plan that has a limit unlike previous unlimited plans from the past-for the common good of all people. You could pay for two life spans of living,but be allowed one life span of offspring-for the same common good of all people.

A friend and I were talking about living indefinitely one night and both decided that if you ever want to see a true class warfare, wait until someone invents a process/treatment for immortality. Imagine how powerful a person or family could become if they could live to be 600 years old. Just think of how much you could learn.

Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer

I'm just saying, get ready to go back to work if you want to live to 200.

Pensions will not be collected by measly 60 year olds anymore. You'll no longer be working for 20,30,40 years, but more like 140 years before you can retire. Especially when we limit the number of children you can have (limiting the number of people paying into your military pension fund, social security, and your private pensions).

I would gladly work up past 150...170...185 if we could live to 200+. Think of how much you could learn and achieve. Unless you hate your job or have no motivation to make a contribution back with discoveries and innovations to mankind, then yeah its kind of pointless to live that long. Theres a few of us who would love to have an extra 100 years to put more effort into our work. Professors, scientists, engineers, doctors...all these great minds could do so much more and continue their hardwork if it wasnt for out limited timespans.

And to argue your SS point, the system would just be revamped, just like it has been in the past few years as people are now living longer. Also more folks should be conscious about saving for retirement and being "smart" with money. Maybe put a cap on the length of time you can withdraw SS checks? My 0.02

And I wont combat your children argument because that is a moral decision that varies from person to person. I only want 1-2 children and no more, but who am I to say you cant have 5-6? So long as we dont have more families like the one in the media that has 19 children, then we could manage me thinks a controlled population and resources. Just takes time and more ideas.

Originally Posted by cowmoo32

A friend and I were talking about living indefinitely one night and both decided that if you ever want to see a true class warfare, wait until someone invents a process/treatment for immortality. Imagine how powerful a person or family could become if they could live to be 600 years old. Just think of how much you could learn.

That was my basis for living longer to begin with. I dont want to live longer just because I think its "cool" but rather achieve more in my lifetime and enjoy many more personal success memories.

Originally Posted by Stickbuilder

I'd insert that you are full of sh!t! I'm closer to 70 than to 60, and I'm having a blast. All my stuff is paid for and I draw 3 pensions plus the Social Security check, and the income from my investments, so money is not a problem. I have all the freedom and free time that I can handle. I'd bet that you would have a tough time keeping up with my ass. Yep, time for your meds.

Both Grandfathers lived to be 96 and were still very active. One Aunt is now 103 and still cuts her own grass. She'll give you a racehorse cussing if you even offer to do it. Chronological age is just that. I know what I'm gonna be when I grow up...........98.

Well said, this is obviously a man who enjoys life and all that comes with it.

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

Well said, this is obviously a man who enjoys life and all that comes with it.

Bet yer sweet ass on that.

Originally Posted by cowmoo32

A friend and I were talking about living indefinitely one night and both decided that if you ever want to see a true class warfare, wait until someone invents a process/treatment for immortality. Imagine how powerful a person or family could become if they could live to be 600 years old. Just think of how much you could learn.

Thought about that too. It would be amazing.

bump for more discussion

When people start living too long I imagine physician-assisted suicide will be common and legal.

I wouldn't want to live to be 150. I'm dreading my 70s.

What's the point of living past 100 if you'll gonna look like sh!t anyways!

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

And I wont combat your children argument because that is a moral decision that varies from person to person. I only want 1-2 children and no more, but who am I to say you cant have 5-6? So long as we dont have more families like the one in the media that has 19 children, then we could manage me thinks a controlled population and resources. Just takes time and more ideas.

even if you have 1-2 children, if you're living to 200, you could conceivably see 6, 7, 8 generations of your descendants. Which, from an egotistical standpoint, might be interesting. But from a population standpoint, it's just going to make things worse.

Before we conquer two centuries of life, we need to find somewhere else to start putting people.

What if instead of living that long as we're thinking now, you could live for 400 years, but only spend part of it awake? For instance, spend 1 year out of three in stasis. Or 2 out of 4 years.