Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

pewresearch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 250 posts

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#241

Post by eloff »

BigJono wrote: post #225
slashdev wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I liked the idea of UBI, but once people have the ability to vote for for politicians who promise to raise the UBI, wouldn't they just keep raising it until capital exits stage left and the economy devolves into a poor socialist economy? It seems like it could be setting a dangerous precedent. Once you start giving people free money, its political suicide to take it away. Look at Greece and Argentina as examples.

I wouldn't worry about it. Lower class people have been voting for governments that give them the shaft for as long as democracy has been a thing. Why would UBI change that?

Because if one party is offering to double my UBI check, they're going to get my vote - and I have the advantage of knowing all the ways that is likely to make everyone poorer overall. Now I don't know how other people think, but it seems reasonable they would also behave like that, maybe even be more likely to do so.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#242

Post by Loughla »

ryanmercer wrote: post #132
Loughla wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but all my friends are married with kids and have zero free time. Then put yourself where they are. As a married friend with kids, I have made it clear to my friends without kids that if you want to hang out, we're headed to the pool or to a park with the kids for the most part. Occasionally we'll have time for adult nights, but because of our geography, childcare is hard to find. Some were okay with that and we're…

>Then put yourself where they are. As a married friend with kids, "Hey Michael, so, yeah, I'm just gonna show up to your kid's third grade graduation, what door do I enter the school in to look like a total creep?" Er... a lot of that stuff is going to be like that, or going to the Children's museum, or a child's park, or family events with extended family, or family vacations/road trips. Kinda creepy to just show up…

I mean, that's being purposefully difficult. Obviously there are places, like a school event, where it is not okay to go hang out.

But why can't you go with a family friend to Chuck-e-Cheese? I'm not saying follow them, obviously. Plan ahead. Why not go with them to hang out while they watch their kids?

Why not accompany the family to the park - if everyone (meaning friend, friend's spouse that sort of thing - not everyone in the park obviously) knows you're there to hang out with your friend, what's the problem? And you get to play with a kid, which can be fun.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#243

Post by Loughla »

balfirevic wrote: post #122
Loughla wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but all my friends are married with kids and have zero free time. Then put yourself where they are. As a married friend with kids, I have made it clear to my friends without kids that if you want to hang out, we're headed to the pool or to a park with the kids for the most part. Occasionally we'll have time for adult nights, but because of our geography, childcare is hard to find. Some were okay with that and we're…

> That's not meant to be as preachy as it maybe sounds. It does, probably because it's so asymmetric. Now, I guess it is expected that the one's own kids will be more important than friends. But this "if friendship is important" thing has to go both ways to at least some extent.

>thing has to go both ways to at least some extent.

That's correct, the problem, in my experience, is that people expect everything to be the same as it was before friend A had a kid. It's called growth and development, and it's healthy for many people.

So expecting them to hang out until 2 am and play video games and drink like you used to is probably not realistic. Maybe, depending on the person.

My point was that if the friendship is important, remember that children aren't a barrier to YOUR needs. That is a human, the care and development of which your friend is personally responsible for. Understand that you may have to hang out with them at a park while their kid plays, rather than in your living room drinking beers.

Does that make sense? I feel like I do a terrible job of explaining myself.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#244

Post by brlewis »

war1025 wrote: post #215
brlewis wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does your first paragraph apply to smaller cities like Boston?

As someone from the Midwest, I'm very amused by your categorization of Boston as a "smaller city". Edit: For reference, this [1] was the "big city" to me growing up. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mason_City,_Iowa

Did people in Mason City seem to be on edge from being around too many other people?

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#245

Post by dangjc »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #190
snarf21 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also why a lot of spouses pass soon after the other. They lose hope and the reason to get out of bed each morning. I keep assuming that as jobs are automated away that we are going to have more people who can do work like visiting elderly people. It also can more than pay for itself by keeping people on their medication regimens and preventing costly hospital visits.

Men are at greater risk than women of dying soon after their spouse. My opinion: This is partly because women do most of "the women's work" of buying groceries, cooking and cleaning. In many older couples, the wife is the one who keeps track of everyone's dietary restrictions. Older men often don't really know how to feed themselves properly. It's not their responsibility to keep track of the myriad types of info inv…

Also women are better at maintaining relationships and friendships, which keep giving their life meaning after their spouses pass.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#246

Post by war1025 »

brlewis wrote: post #244
war1025 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone from the Midwest, I'm very amused by your categorization of Boston as a "smaller city". Edit: For reference, this [1] was the "big city" to me growing up. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mason_City,_Iowa

Did people in Mason City seem to be on edge from being around too many other people?

No I don't suppose so.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#247

Post by MiroF »

rayiner wrote: post #184
tptacek wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're in the wrong city. I was at Longman and Eagle last week and the back bar was lousy with kids. This probably sounds like a throwaway comment, but it's not; there are big cities that are more friendly and less friendly to kids. An advantage of places like Chicago is that the trendy areas are shared between people with families and single people, where in New York the family-friendly neighborhoods are specialized…

I mean there is an element of that. Several of my friends have converged on the same neighborhood in Lakeview. My experience is colored by living in DC the last couple of years, which is mostly devoid of kids. (Of course, not in primarily minority area, where there are still kids, but those families are being pushed out by gentrification.)

Upper NW DC has plenty of kids

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#248

Post by Dylan16807 »

wolco wrote: post #235
BigJono wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not hard to find purpose in life that doesn't revolve around sitting at a desk doing fuck all and pretending to work for 40 hours a week. People will still work. Whether it's to get a leg up from the baseline or because it's something their passionate about, nothing will stop people from banding together to solve common goals. The current state of work is just a really shitty abstraction over that. I would have…

That world doesn't and won't exist for most. In places where jobs are being lost and no one works people band together for crime more than innovation. The common goal being additional money. If you look at the wealthiest innovation is not what they do with there freetime either. Innovation requires motivation. Innovation requires resources.

> In places where jobs are being lost and no one works people band together for crime more than innovation. The common goal being additional money.

Because they're being thrown into poverty with no way out.

The problem is not ennui.

> If you look at the wealthiest

Yeah sure, but UBI isn't going to make everyone multimillionaires.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#249

Post by stirfrykitty »

meheleventyone wrote: post #173
stirfrykitty wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hunting is a very social exercise. My sons are not yet old enough to go without prattling on about this or that, spooking any game worth taking. I'm planning on next season taking one at a time and teaching them the craft and all that goes into it, which is great bonding. My dad was not much of a hunter, but my grandfather was, and because of that, some of my fondest memories are of us hunting doves and rabbits, and…

You realise “British hunting” isn’t egalitarian and the cigars and G&T aren’t going to the people driving game? I also don’t think the person you replied to was doing down hunting as a social activity but that the movie makes it a stand in for anything done to avoid that social activity.

In the olden days you would be right, but today's drives are fair. Everyone takes turns driving and shooting. Everyone in the clubhouse after the hunt. It would be anathema to leave someone out and that would not be my scene.

Re: Older Americans are alone half their waking hours, on average

#250

Post by kwhitefoot »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #171
kwhitefoot wrote: post #164

Strange article. All it does is recite the statistics but it doesn't explain why anyone should care. It seems from the comments here that solitude is equated with isolation and with loneliness but this is not necessarily the case. I think the problem for many who are lonely is that they feel, perhaps correctly, that they have no choice, no power to change the situation. For me solitude is a necessity but of course if…

> While time spent alone is not necessarily associated with adverse effects, it can be used as a measure of social isolation, which in turn is linked with negative health outcomes among older adults. Medical experts suspect that lifestyle factors may explain some of this association – for instance, someone who is socially isolated may have less cognitive stimulation and more difficulty staying active or taking their…

Looks like you missed my point. Chosen solitude does not imply that there is no one on hand for a medical emergency nor that one has less cognitive stimulation. Nor does it necessarily imply that one is socially isolated.
Post reply on HN