Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Watching how things go with the FIL, I have no ambition to get to his age. But he was fine until about 90, so at 99 he is loosing his memory.
"Hang in there until at least 80"
My plan is to take matters into my own hands in my mid eighties if nature doesn't step in. How many folks do you know that are actually enjoying life beyond their mid 80s?<>
Be sure to keep us posted as you progress towards that time. FIL was fine up past 90 but now he has trouble finding his way to the door. The thing is, he thinks he's fine.
I have always thought the idea of immortality was awful. Living is tiring. I've had a rough life, and poor health, and I know by my 60s I will suffer some degree of disability. I would rather die young and still healthy, than slog through decades of suffering.
What I said was that many 70 year olds are still having the time of their life. Why leave in the middle of the party?
I think it's the perfect time. At 75 I will have been retired for a solid 20 years. All of my savings will have been depleted. The world of 2050 will be largely an alien place to me in a vast variety of ways (much like 2017 is a somewhat foreign place to my father, only to a far greater degree). I'll likely be just on the cusp of declining health, still strong of mind, body, and spirit. Not *too many* of my peers and siblings will have died off. I can have a meaningful celebration of life and of my life with the people I care for, before signing off on a life well lived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShadow
...picking an arbitrary age where many people are still just getting started on their retirement...
Don't misunderstand, this is right for ME. I'm not trying to say anyone else should consider this or do what I'm doing. I am hoping there's still a job that I can do through 2030, but I don't foresee being *able* to work much past that. Estimates from analysts such as PwC put the chances of the type of job roles I embody being automated by 2033 at well above 50%. But beyond that, I don't WANT to work past age 55. I save most of what I make so I can get out, so that 75 is not where I'm "just getting started on my retirement."
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheShadow
One person's 70 could be just like someone else's 50, or 90 for that matter.
Sure. I don't disagree. Everyone should look at their individual lives, finances, values, health, genetics, plans, goals, worldviews, etc. and make their own decisions. The only thing I caution is to not fall victim to ideological thought [programming] that can dull rational individual thought.
A good friend of mine and I have talked about this on a number of occasions. He's a bit more of a transhumanist than I am. He's 43 and wants to make it past 100 or 120. I respect his desire. It's definitely not for me. And one simple reason is that I think the world of, say, 2094 is not anything I care to experience. Yes, there will be a lot of "cool" tech beyond our wildest imaginings, but the complete and utter loss of any semblance of the way of life in which I thrived and developed my worldview will be a distant, fading, and probably hopelessly revised memory five times over. I'd love to study it the way historians study the past, but I don't have much desire to live very far into it.
Two states already give patients meeting certain conditions the right to medically assisted suicide. A some point with the insurance and healthcare system under so much strain, I think that people will have to decide before they get sick how much they want to spend on end of life treatment.
When that money is spent, you go to a palliative care specialist who also can give you a less expensive, messy and traumatic ending.
Two states already give patients meeting certain conditions the right to medically assisted suicide. A some point with the insurance and healthcare system under so much strain, I think that people will have to decide before they get sick how much they want to spend on end of life treatment.
When that money is spent, you go to a palliative care specialist who also can give you a less expensive, messy and traumatic ending.
Hmmmm...........have you ever watched the movie Soylent Green? They made it so lovely to die.
A good friend of mine and I have talked about this on a number of occasions. He's a bit more of a transhumanist than I am. He's 43 and wants to make it past 100 or 120. I respect his desire. It's definitely not for me. And one simple reason is that I think the world of, say, 2094 is not anything I care to experience. Yes, there will be a lot of "cool" tech beyond our wildest imaginings, but the complete and utter loss of any semblance of the way of life in which I thrived and developed my worldview will be a distant, fading, and probably hopelessly revised memory five times over. I'd love to study it the way historians study the past, but I don't have much desire to live very far into it.
That's good. You do you. I will check out on my own terms WHILE it's fun, and before I'm forced to start making weighted value judgments.
Wow, those are mind-blowing articles! They make want to embrace them and run screaming into 75mph freeway traffic at the same time.
I don't know, I just don't know. I want my private space, where I can leave for an hour or 2 weeks and return and everything will be exactly as I left it. But at the same time I'm conscious at the huge price I'm paying for my private space. At the same time I recognize that so much of what I have would be more suitable to rent or pay by use. For example, I wish I could have an unlimited TV satellite/cable that charges me only by the amount of time my TV is switched on. But no, they want me to buy all the services 24/7 by the month...
In the end I guess it comes down to this. I have some possessions I want to keep just because they are important to me; memorabilia, my reference books, my original art collection (real art, not prints). I want to have my waggy-tail dog there to greet me when I get home.
I'll admit, right now if it didn't hamper my mobility and if it works the way the articles prophesied then I'd give up my car in a hot minute if I could have door-to-door transportation service with no waiting and fast transit time. And since many of my trips are grocery shopping I'd be just as happy to shop online and have it show up at my door if the price is competitive with life as we know it now.
As perfectly reasonable as this may seem to you, no.
Just no.
If you truly believe what you wrote, then suicide should always be socially acceptable, regardless of age or situation. And if it's considered universally acceptable, then it would always be considered a viable choice.
Do we really need MORE suicides? That is supposed to be healthy?
It should be socially acceptable under certain conditions. Isn't it all about the context? If the person doesn't have any dependents, then who is to say they can't end their own life if that's what they want to do?
We own our own bodies, don't we? We're in charge of what we do to our own bodies, how we manage them, what we demand of them, it is therefore axiomatic that we have the right to "vacate the premises" whenever we wish.
You might find it socially unacceptable, but who gives a crap?
My religion and faith hold life to be precious and suicide to be verboten. I'll go with that although it's a personal choice and not for everyone. Different strokes and all that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.