HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » TheKentuckian » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: 1

TheKentuckian

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Jun 6, 2008, 03:47 AM
Number of posts: 20,274

Journal Archives

Not even then.

We don't need more people in the labor force and need less and less as we move into the future all more people does is reduce life time wages for most people and the program gets worse off.

Then all this talk of the ease of a desk job till 70 is batshit crazy as well, even if bodies are better preserved, the minds tend to be less sharp, health issues mount, and employers are less inclined to hire and retain.
There isn't a single 60 year old in my job, none even in management. There are very few 50 year olds and at 40, I'm an old dog, older or the same age as management.
I'm not going to be able to keep up the pace at 60 if my job is still even around and by 70, I'll be long gone wishing Walmart still needed greeters no matter how much I want to keep doing it, which I won't because I'll be burnt out and far too slow to be an asset.

No one is talking a mandatory work life expiration date here, if you are in demand and able then rock on but it is folly to pretend that such will be the average condition for workers.

It foolish, cruel, and soulless along with being counter productive to the asserted aim, why do you want to expand on a glut of workers? What in the world is in it for you? Trying to reduce labor costs?
Posted by TheKentuckian | Sat Nov 17, 2012, 04:15 PM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1