How does one define 'old', or ‘elderly’? In some countries, for instance, Singapore, anyone aged above 65 is considered old. In Japan, however, as stated in the article, one is generally not considered old until he or she reaches the age of 100. This is largely due to the huge advancements in medical discoveries and also the falling birth rate of Japan. People now live longer, thus the term ‘old’ is relative.
In this article, Hannah Beech touches on the issue of a country having an aging population. What's different about this article is instead of portraying an aging population as a hindrance to the country’s economic growth and society, it states that the elderly are the ones who are, or will be contributing more to the country. The title, ‘aging gracefully’, gives a whole new meaning to the phrase ‘growing old’. When we say that someone has aged, or can be classified as an elderly, one usually jumps to the conclusion that he or she has retired and can no longer contribute to society. However, in this article, instead of conforming the elderly to that stereotype, it says that ‘it’s hardly fair to dismiss senior citizens as an inevitable burden on society’, implying that senior citizens do indeed play a major role in a country’s growth, thus, the main idea of this article is that it is fine to have a country with elderly citizens as the majority, since they are able to contribute to society just as well as younger citizens, or do an even better job.
I agree with the author as I think the elderly can contribute to society in many ways, and thus should not be perceived as ‘sitting idly at home’. Raising the retirement age to encourage them to re-join the workforce will not only raise the social status of the elderly, but also help boost the economy in Japan. This will change the general impression people have of the elderly as old folks who feed off the pension funds and wait for the government to provide for them. The article states that ‘Britons over 50 years of age, for instance, control 75% of the country's wealth’. 75% is a huge proportion, and a change in this could lead to a country’s downfall or growth, so how can one say that elderly citizens are a burden on society?
However, this idea that having an aged population is fine certainly has many loopholes. Although the current situation of countries with aging populations is still relativey stable, how much longer can it last? In Japan, the proportion of elderly citizens is ‘set to reach 42% by 2050’. This will definitely cripple the economy as there is a limit to how much elderly citizens can contribute to society. Compared to younger citizens, the elderly are definitely less dynamic and may be slower in solving problems, or even less creative in coming up with ideas, thus having an aged workforce will surely do more harm then good to a country. Also, the country has to increase the budget for pension payments and healthcare schemes for the elderly, therefore leaving fewer resources for other sectors such as education.
This idea cannot be taken seriously as there are too many risks involved. Countries facing population crisis should seek alternatives, such as employing foreign talent, or giving baby bonuses to try to raise their birth rate to counter the effects of an aging population, lest it suffers an economic slowdown.
0 comments:
Post a Comment