Work peak and professional decline (2019) • Hacker News Board

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#131

Post by freddie_mercury » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 2:17 AM UTC

simonsarris wrote: post #123

freddie_mercury wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Related: The notion of "retirement" is a relatively recent invention. Not really. The idea of old people who could no longer work effectively but still had many years of their life ahead of them is not a recent invention. The notion of an old age pension -- whether paid by a company or a government -- that "everyone" got is relatively new. But that doesn't mean "retirement" is new. It was just paid for by individua…

> entire other half of humanity -- women -- who also weren't in the workforce What on earth? To think the entirety of women of any age group in 1880 did not work is very "not even wrong" territory. They worked all kinds of jobs, inside and outside the home, from a very young age to old age. Many industries employed more women than men. Flip to page 208 if you want a table. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/pub…

Your reference supports my point. It says that in 1900 under 10% of women over 65 were in "gainful employment". I wasn't talking about women-as-a-whole, since the context we're talking about is people over 65.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#132

Post by freddie_mercury » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 2:27 AM UTC

solveit wrote: post #80

freddie_mercury wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Related: The notion of "retirement" is a relatively recent invention. Not really. The idea of old people who could no longer work effectively but still had many years of their life ahead of them is not a recent invention. The notion of an old age pension -- whether paid by a company or a government -- that "everyone" got is relatively new. But that doesn't mean "retirement" is new. It was just paid for by individua…

> 25% of men over 65 didn't toil in the workforce, so clearly retirement had already been "invented" But were they retired by choice or were they just too frail to work? > And, of course, there is the entire other half of humanity -- women -- who also weren't in the workforce. Kind of true, but not exactly retirement either, and most of them weren't not working, they were working inside the household.

People who are "retired" today also work inside the household. They're still making food, doing laundry, and often looking after grandchildren.

Even though retirement has been "invented", 60% of grandparents provide childcare in the US and 27% of people over 65 are still in the workforce.

There's clearly been some change in the past ~100 years, would be pretty weird if there hadn't!, but I'm not convinced there's really a bright line of "retirement was invented, before and after".

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#133

Post by failwhaleshark » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 2:30 AM UTC

So at 15, I was offered a paid internship at IBM Almaden in the field of dark matter research. Unfortunately, the laws at the time prevented anyone under 15.5 from holding a job (it's since changed to 14). From ages 15-19, I was constantly solicited with interview offers. I could surmise this was based more on youth halo rather than anything else, because what does a kid know?

At 43, I get interview requests for FAANG-level companies several times per year without a LinkedIn account or a résumé. The main things I have going for me are I don't look 43 and I date college girls. Maybe that helps keep me from seeming coasting, declining, and/or stogy. I can't type as fast as I did at 20, but I pace myself (I gave myself RSI from not working-out enough and typing too much without breaks.)

I never want to "retire" but move to different roles and/or fields before either I or the field declines. To me, retirement is death either by boredom, distractions, idleness, or decline.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#134

Post by lmm » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 2:36 AM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #125

lmm wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Per pound, it doesn't seem that bad. That's circular reasoning; carrying zillions of kilos around with you is the part that's inefficient.

Perhaps, but going down that path means making a moral judgement about every activity someone undertakes. Fuel efficiency is at least fairly objective. Whether someone should stay at home instead of travel in their RV, that is a moral thing. And I'm pretty sure that just about 0 people have an unassailable record of life choices.

> Perhaps, but going down that path means making a moral judgement about every activity someone undertakes. Fuel efficiency is at least fairly objective.

That's like the drunk searching for his keys under the streetlamp rather than where he dropped them. Does that mean it's somehow environmentally friendly to drive an 18-wheeler on a road trip rather than a motorbike, because the per-ton fuel efficiency is higher? The fair comparison to an RV trip is an equivalent vacation experience, and while we can argue about the details of what that means, it's certainly not just an equal tonnage.

> Whether someone should stay at home instead of travel in their RV, that is a moral thing. And I'm pretty sure that just about 0 people have an unassailable record of life choices.

Ideally I'd like to set a carbon tax at a level that fully covers the costs of repairing the damage, and take the moral element out of the equation - then we can just say that x litres of petrol costs y, and it's up to you whether that's worth it or not. But given that we don't have such a thing (and these people are presumably not offsetting), I'd say that you should at least make sure the fun you're getting out of something is proportional to your emissions; if you're doing something that's marginally fun but extremely polluting then I do think it's fair to judge you for that.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#135

Post by AlwaysRock » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 2:55 AM UTC

readme wrote: post #82

ketzo wrote: post #64

I am quite surprised at the amount of negativity surrounding this piece. Yes, it's sort of clickbait-y. You don't need to feel like you're about to wither and die because you just turned 44. Yes, it's deeply anecdotal. Lots of older people are incredibly successful in their fields. That 65-year old engineer you know is great! But frankly, it doesn't matter who you are, or what you do: you will begin to get worse at i…

young people think they're invincible i'm only in my 30s and already started my retirement hobby (wordworking) i'll take this career as far as I can but you never know when the day will come that you've had enough and can't bare to go to work anymore -- it gets harder to just leave a job for another one if you don't like it when you're in your late 50s.

I'm grateful that I have a career outside of engineering where I had success and played a sport at a high level and had success. Both of those are in my past now and when they stopped being a huge part of who I was it was really difficult for a while.

However now I'm much better at enjoying things outside of work and sport. I cant imagine what having that realization at 40 or 50 would be like. It would probably feel like the majority of your life was a lie.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#136

Post by maxerickson » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 3:08 AM UTC

cubano wrote: post #74

disabled wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a trashy article. A lot of elderly Americans, including in the upper middle class, never retire due to Medicare being inadequate. You can quite literally save millions for retirement as an individual, and have coverage for drugs and treatment under Medicare, and still run out of money due to having to pay extortionate prices for covered drugs. This line in the article is quite revealing and strange, contextually…

> You can quite literally save millions for retirement as an individual, and have coverage for drugs and treatment under Medicare, and still run out of money due to having to pay extortionate prices for covered drugs. This is a totally ridiculous statement. Medicare-assisted drug costs are absolutely NOT going to bankrupt someone who has very wisely saved "millions" for retirement. I have watched both my parents now…

I know someone on Medicare that has a 1 pill a day prescription with a sticker price that multiplies out to $45,000 a year. I don't know if that is what ends up getting paid though, and I guess it's still not going to burn through millions.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#137

Post by anonfornoreason » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 3:22 AM UTC

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #69

caeril wrote: post #10

Related: The notion of "retirement" is a relatively recent invention. Traditionally, when you were too old to work the farm or prove the theorem (sorry, cognitive decline is a well-documented thing, and tends to coincide with physical decline[1]), you would "retire" to a productive life in less-demanding pursuits: caretaking of the grandkids, woodworking, food preservation, writing, etc. It's important to maintain ho…

If somebody is as illiterate as I am: metformin is type II diabetes medicine.

It’s commonly prescribed as an anti-aging drug, which is maybe what the OP meant, though I can laugh either way!

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#138

Post by lupire » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 3:30 AM UTC

StevePerkins wrote: post #94

cek wrote: post #2

There's no real data behind this article. It's basically ageism fueled by self-doubt.

"The Atlantic" has seriously fallen off over the past few years. I've been a regular subscriber for two decades now. I've have always enjoyed it as a source of articles from a fairly liberal perspective, yet nevertheless prone to serious introspection and regular challenges to that perspective. In the Age of Trump, however, it really has just descended into blog-caliber clickbait. The effort at introspection and crit…

I feel the same way (but wonder how much is me getting wiser as I aged) and I think the death of The Puzzler was a sign of the Atlantic's slide into pseudo-intelllectualism.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#139

Post by vkou » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 3:40 AM UTC

d0mine wrote: post #108

vkou wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, prior to the start of the industrial revolution, the definition of "productivity" was "Spend nearly every waking hour tending the fields (that someone else owns) if you're a man, or spinning flax and wool (to make clothes for you and your family) if you're a woman." Not much left to better the community when keeping yourself fed and clothed[1] is two full-time jobs. And that's for free-persons, who aren't s…

Injustice is not the only way to get new technology even if you believe that there is a connection between the two notions. Also, by your logic it wouldn't be enough for people to work around the clock just to survive in hunter-gathering times

In hunter-gatherer times, we didn't wear as many woven textiles, and we didn't rely on agriculture (Which results in a much higher caloric output of an acre of land, but requires vastly more labour to produce the same number of calories.)

The problem with being a hunter-gatherer is that your agricultural neighbours move in, settle down, work their asses off, have lots of children, and then war with you until they push you off your land. And nine times out of ten, they win this war, because their way of life supports a lot more people per acre of land.

This is why the world is full of agricultural societies, and the few remaining hunter-gatherers have been pushed into unproductive, fringe territories.

Re: Work peak and professional decline (2019)

#140

Post by lupire » Tue, Mar 30, 2021, 3:47 AM UTC

john_moscow wrote: post #38

lettergram wrote: post #5

One of the most productive engineers I knew (who I’m guessing will read this) was in his 60s when I met him. He’s since “retired” and helped a company obtain a $1B valuation. Similarly, my 85 year old grandfather still doesn’t own a wheelbarrow and will move stone, dirt, etc every summer. His motto is “keep moving”, I don’t think there’s really anything else to it. Yes you will slow down, but stay engaged and motivat…

>One of the most productive engineers I knew (who I’m guessing will read this) was in his 60s when I met him. When I visited a hospital recently, the healthiest-looking person in the 106 years old. I know it because the nurse was super excited talking to her and asking if there is any special secret to staying healthy that long. Statistically, though, the health does degrade with age. Outliers and anecdata are good f…

The main thing that >100 yr old people tend to have in common is being born on places with poor record keeping of child births.