I think we have fifteen years left, at most, before climate change starts making much of the planet uninhabitable
Much of the planet? Really? I can understand writing off Phoenix, AZ or parts of South East Asia and the Middle East.
Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
101–110 of 135 posts
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
China and the US depend too much on eachother to fight a large scale war. Russia's geopolitical ambitions has currently been limited to forcefully annexing Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Odessa from Ukraine. They will most likely get Donetsk and Luhansk and fail at permanently annexing the other regions. Neither will lead to a large scale global war.
> China and the US depend too much on eachother to fight a large scale war. They also said that in 1914.
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
100 doesn’t sound extremely optimistic. Jimmy Carter is 98. Kissinger is 100. Munger is 99. Buffett is 92, Dick Van Dyke is 97, Mel Brooks is 96,… The body can last well into the late 90’s. It’s probably just a matter of treating people who get heart disease, cancer(s), etc that will get more people there.
You are picking the wealthiest people in the world as an example. Most of the population to even wealthy do not have access to this kind of health care, which is going to be exacerbated by health care rationing as populations explode due to international immigration.
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#104According to the actuarial tables Social Security uses [0] to estimate lifespan, a female born today has an average life expectancy of 81. 76 if you happen to be male.
Let's just focus on the female population since that number is better. What is the maximum age a given population could reach, considering all environmental factors are perfect? Is it much greater than 100? If not, won't it be very difficult to remove all of the environmental factors from consequence?
We would have to greatly reduce risks like heart disease and cancer, which collectively claim 1.2m lives a year in the US [1], which will take massive dietary changes. We'd also have to eliminate most accidental deaths, which are currently over 200k / year and include fun things like car accidents and opiate overdoses.
Assuming we make all of the changes, our world will be pretty different. People will eat a lot healthier, drive practically nowhere, and abstain from drinking and drug use. A tall order on a short timespan, but worth it if we can get there.
On the other hand, most of us like to eat what we want, drive where we want, have some drinks here and there, and receive pain meds when our risky behavior leads to an injury.
[0] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html [1] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#105Although health and wealth have both backslid, and both affect longevity...
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#106While I'm concerned about the impacts of climate change and diseases, I am interested in the idea here that we can get to an average life expectancy of 100. According to the actuarial tables Social Security uses [0] to estimate lifespan, a female born today has an average life expectancy of 81. 76 if you happen to be male. Let's just focus on the female population since that number is better. What is the maximum age…
Although health and wealth have both backslid, and both affect longevity...
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#107Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#108This is not likely. Life expectancy is going down while chronic disease is going up. Most of it has to do with lifestyle in ways the average person isn't aware of. The health care system is more capable than ever before. But, lifestyles that are poor to long term health are taking the trend in the opposite direction.
Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#109Re: Today's 5-year-olds will likely live to 100
#110Maybe the few that can afford to. Wealthy nation ≠ wealthy people.
Most of the problems are pretty much self-inflicted (addiction, homelessness) than any fundamental wealth issue.