Here’s two worthwhile pieces on growing old:
This, Fighting against ageism and this, Aging is inevitable, so why not do it joyfully? Here’s how.
How we see growing old is a cultural thing. When I first went to pick out a photo, I decided on the first one of the man running. Because I am a product of my culture, as they say. I see being fit and young and productive as valuable. Especially in our culture, being able to produce is highly valued. That’s why ageism occurs. If you show signs of age, people assume you will produce less. So your value decreases to them.
Then I saw the picture below. In other cultures, being able to sit and converse with your friends is valuable. These people are not being productive. They are not trying to look young. They are being social. They are being human.
I think we have problems in our society because for many the chief purpose of humans is to produce, to be productive. As long as that is true, we will have problems with ageism. True, we need times of our life to be productive, but we also need times for growth, times for rest and reflection. To combine all those times effectively is to live a good life. A life where all humans at all times of their lives are valued.
(First Photo by Lisa Wall on Unsplash. Second Photo by Cristina Gottardi on Unsplash )
Here’s something to ponder on a Sunday:
The rich were meant to have the most leisure time. The working poor were meant to have the least. The opposite is happening.
That is extracted from this: The Free-Time Paradox in America – The Atlantic
It’s a fascinating study of work and leisure and why it is not what many expected.
This is a good piece: How to redesign cities to fight loneliness.
It talks about how cities and services can be changed to fight loneliness. This is good. The flipside of it, though, is that cities are designed and have evolved to promote loneliness. One of the reasons people come to cities is to get away from things. The cost of that is often loneliness.
Cities are not the only contributor. Digital technology also can contribute to loneliness. But like cities, digital technology can also help to assist those struggling with being alone.
The bigger problem is loneliness in general. Cities and digital technologies can help there. But there are bigger social and cultural issues in the mix, and those need to be addressed as well.
Two links worth reading on Finland and UBI: this one and this one.
Essentially, Finland did a form of UBI and it didn’t work. Those for UBI will argue it was implemented poorly. Those against UBI will argue those people are purists and in fact UBI will never work.
I think there are limits to UBI, but the Finnish implementation was poor. I think it can be done better than that. Read the two pieces in the New York Times and decide for yourself.
This is fascinating. Among other reasons, it shows so many people have significant amounts of their living space that they rarely use (the living room, the dining room). I imagine many eat their meals either in the kitchen or the family room. Based on this diagram, I can easily see people being able to get by with almost half the square footage pictured above.
It is nice to have that extra space, but if you wished you could live in a larger space but cannot afford it, you might console yourself with knowing you might not use it anyway. Save your money and live with what you need.
Reading this, Japan’s Prisons Are a Haven for Elderly Women – Bloomberg, you realize just how terrible prison is as a means of solving any social ills. All of the women in this piece could have better ways to deal with their problems. They lack money or social connections, and prison is the worst way of providing those. Yet that is where they go to solve their problems.
It’s a good piece. And a good reminder of why with a few exceptions, prisons are a poor way to deal with problems.
(Image from twenty20.com)
According to the New York Times, the Frightful Five are Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and Alphabet, Google’s parent company. What makes them frightening?
(The Frightful Five) have experienced astounding growth over the last few years, making them the world’s five most valuable public companies. Because they own the technology that will dominate much of life for the foreseeable future, they are also gaining vast social and political power over much of the world beyond tech.
These companies are getting alot more scrutiny lately. Any organization as wealthy and powerful as they are warrant it. Especially so because we aren’t even certain what impact they have on our societies. I hope the Times and other newspapers continue to give them focus and question their power. And I hope more writers like Scott Galloway examine what these companies do in books like the one he has just written. Most importantly, I hope you continue to seek out information on these companies and question how you interact with them, either directly or indirectly as a member of society.