Hacker News Reader

Comment by jrbapna | Hacker News Reader

As the pace of innovation in healthcare continues to increase exponentially, 40 will be the new 30 and eventually the new 20. People who are 40 now might live to 120. Am I being too optimistic? Probably. But I wouldn't be surprised if a whole lot of us live a LOT longer than our grandparents did.

View on HN

What will be age of retirement in the future is an interesting question. I'm not sure I want to live to 120 if it means I cannot reasonably retire until I'm 95.

I'm not sure I want to live to 120 if it means I cannot reasonably retire until I'm 95.

So working is literally worse than death?

No, not at the moment, but 60 something years from now it probably will be; that's a lot of time to spend making bits flip so some man or woman I'll likely never meet can be advertised to in some new innovative disruptive way (or whatever mundane/evil task your industry is involved in).

It takes 5-10 years of work to retire.

http://www.amazon.com/Early-Retirement-Extreme-Philosophical...

http://earlyretirementextreme.com/

Sure if you want to live your life like a robot for five years then it's totally doable. That approach takes extreme discipline which most people do not have. Also kids throw a wrench into that strategy.

It's actually quite possible that AI and machine's will replace a lot jobs by then and there'll be a basic income guarantee for all. See https://blog.ycombinator.com/basic-income

I sincerely hope that's how such a future would pan out.

I'm a little mystified when people say this since it seems to me that access to healthcare is only getting harder. Many routine health services are already prohibitively expensive for many people to purchase. What makes people think that anti-aging therapy would be within the reach of the average person?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com