That wasn't an opinion, that was propaganda. It was and still is in his best interests that young people buy that line, because from his perspective young people are not so much smarter as cheaper: fewer commitments, willing to put up with longer hours.

Less experience to see through the bullshit from companies too and they do not yet really believe they are just a number in the cost center column in HR and that the company they are working with will not waste 1 second before getting rid of you.

That's quite true. Once people have commitments like a family, they are less willing to put up with companies that demand so much.

No family, but been around long enough to see through the bullshit.

Why would it? He will never face any sort of age discrimination; he's got so much money that his grandchildren's grandchildren will never need to look for work.

They are, aren't they? Doesn't intelligence peak and then drop with age?

However, I'm sure it's more than compensated for by experience.

You start investing intelligence and effort where it really counts so I'd say most younger people I worked with are extremely inefficient but hyper-energetic and willing to waste time and energy on insignificant problems.

This is necessary for education of course but it's often times not contributing to a business' bottom line.

More mature people are almost universally more valuable for a business.

It drops only by a couple of points, and you can lessen the drop with regular physical excercise. I'd say that experience and lifelong education overcompensates for it.

His opinion already changed when he hit 30. I can't find the article but a few years ago he stated something like he wishes he could take that quote back and doesn't believe in it anymore.