Re:The economic value of targeting aging
by jjoonathan on Thursday July 22, 2021 @03:09PM
(#27922908)
You know that Simpson's episode where Bart lines up a bunch of megaphones so that the amplified output of each one goes into the input of the next? Obviously in the real world the sound would saturate. Exponential amplification would stop after one or two megaphones as a few tones would "win" and suppress the others. The joke is that in the cartoon world it keeps on going and turns into a sonic tidal wave and we all laugh at the idea of ten megaphones producing a sonic tidal wave.
Yet when we design an economic system by the exact same principle, people wonder why we get ten shrieking megaphones instead of a magical tidal wave.
A distracting thought: isn't it striking how "real property ownership" has returned as a marker of better societal status? A mere 50-60 years ago, even working class could own (arguably not very nice) dwellings in coastal California etc.
The same development can be seen in Europe.
If I had to choose, I'd rather be an owner of 3-4 nice pieces of real estate than a highly qualified professional. This is a certain return to feudalism, in a sense.
As for your original idea: going from 600 to 700 is not a big deal. But the intermediate phase is going to be a big challenge. The first generation that enjoys the possibility of life extension to, say, 120, is going occupy their positions of power for a disproportionately long time and will need to be persuaded to step away; possibly in exchange for a lot of money.