Alas, just that number of agencies involved in this discussion (16???) shows how top-heavy government services are. Everybody wants to work at the top tier, but nobody wants to do the literal dirty work of caring for seniors. Our whole medical system needs an overhaul, not just the aging-related sector of it. And the more alienated from human interaction the younger generations become, the bigger this problem will become. Gen-Zs right now would love to have all us old farts just do us all a favor and die. Please.
Well, there's lots of desert out here in the West and is seems that a lot of old people with limited means, social skills, and mental stability are finding places to ride out their elder years.
Don, what I'd love to see is candidates for local, state and federal elected office do is actually talk about what they would do to make stuff in this plan a reality. And, of course, I'd like to see the plan address ageism. But there you go! Have a great weekend!
An old discussion since 2002, the International Plan for Action on Aging as well as the Beijing Platform for Women, 1995 and turned into repeated slogans as Poverty Wears the Face of Older Women!
I love that this is in discussion! The "who's going to pay for it " thing is BS. The British started the National Health Service when the nation was in debt and practically bankrupt after WWII. The New Deal entailed massive federal spending after the economy almost collapsed, and we're still using the infrastructure from parks to sewers today: Tons of economic activity from building to running. (Check out http://livingnewdeal.org a nonprofit run by a Berkeley geographer to map all this.)) That's Keynesian economics, and it works. Because it works, that's why it's been under attack by the obscenely greedy ever since, because economic gains are reinvested in the people, not in people like them owning ten "homes" and launching space rockets. Here's to New Deal 2.
Alas, just that number of agencies involved in this discussion (16???) shows how top-heavy government services are. Everybody wants to work at the top tier, but nobody wants to do the literal dirty work of caring for seniors. Our whole medical system needs an overhaul, not just the aging-related sector of it. And the more alienated from human interaction the younger generations become, the bigger this problem will become. Gen-Zs right now would love to have all us old farts just do us all a favor and die. Please.
Unfortunately for them, shipping us out on icebergs is now impractical because of global warming.
Well, there's lots of desert out here in the West and is seems that a lot of old people with limited means, social skills, and mental stability are finding places to ride out their elder years.
Don, what I'd love to see is candidates for local, state and federal elected office do is actually talk about what they would do to make stuff in this plan a reality. And, of course, I'd like to see the plan address ageism. But there you go! Have a great weekend!
Great suggestions! Hopefully candidates will offer more than platitudes.
An old discussion since 2002, the International Plan for Action on Aging as well as the Beijing Platform for Women, 1995 and turned into repeated slogans as Poverty Wears the Face of Older Women!
Wondering if the "strategic framework" would consider looking into lowering costs for food for this cohort . . . just askin'.
Like, say, senior discounts on groceries?
That’s a good idea!
I love that this is in discussion! The "who's going to pay for it " thing is BS. The British started the National Health Service when the nation was in debt and practically bankrupt after WWII. The New Deal entailed massive federal spending after the economy almost collapsed, and we're still using the infrastructure from parks to sewers today: Tons of economic activity from building to running. (Check out http://livingnewdeal.org a nonprofit run by a Berkeley geographer to map all this.)) That's Keynesian economics, and it works. Because it works, that's why it's been under attack by the obscenely greedy ever since, because economic gains are reinvested in the people, not in people like them owning ten "homes" and launching space rockets. Here's to New Deal 2.
Great summary! Many thanks, Don!