Do old people matter as much as younger people?

I deal with a lot of British people in work, usually around my age category (late twenties) and anytime Brexit comes up in conversation, they go on tirades about the 'selfish' decision taken by elderly voters who are 'going to die soon anyway'.

When the household tax was being introduced in Ireland in 2012, advocates for the elderly often warned that it wasn't fair to ignore circumstances when elderly people happened to be living in fairly large homes, where they had raised their families and wanted to remain living. Many (and I suspect, the majority) of people insisted that if they cannot afford to pay the tax, they should move out of their homes, and sell to families who need them.

Frequently, 'pensioners' seem to be portrayed in the media as selfish and parochial. The very word 'pensioners' conjures up a cantankerous mob with a demand for entitlement, in a way that rarely applies to the sick, to refugees, or to others who genuinely need public support.

I'm uneasy with the idea that one's opinion matters less because that person only has 10 or 20 years life expectancy.

While they are here, their opinions and their needs should be regarded just as importantly as someone who may only be in their 20s, there should be no priority given to younger citizens. Popular opinion often seems far too willing to pander to the opinions of younger people.

What do you think?

Burial.

#OldLivesMatter

jackinthemix94

Everybody should be equal BUT I understand the problem with the Brexit decision; that older people who don't have a long life expectancy have basically sold younger people down the river for the decades to come (because of outdated views about what "Great Britain" is in the 21st Century).

SeantoBarry

I think the younger Brits should show more respect to the generation that rebuilt the UK from rubble after World War 2.

sunbeam

The Brits old enough to remember the war were generally anti-Brexit, it was the following generation who were most in favour of it.

Fleawuss

The old curse: interesting times. We are moving into if we aren't already there of impossibly fragmented demographics and subgroups pulling in all directions.

One big worry for me is that this will be exploited by the wealthiest elite to further enrich themselves.

Donald Trump

Milfs ftw

Del2005

Until young people get organised and more importantly vote then yes Old people matter more. Our political system, and the UK, is built on getting votes and old people vote so they get what they want.

Look at how many thousands came out when they tried to take the medical card off them, do you think that many working young people who've had more taken from them in USC/pension levy than any old person, could have gotten as big a turnout or about face from the government?

beauf

Awful lot of people had their greatest achievements late in late.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/618874/late-bloomers-sixty-plus-greatest-achievements-Judi-Dench-Karl-Lagerfield-Ranulph-Fiennes
http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/7-late-life-success-stories

endacl

Burial. wrote: »

#OldLivesMatter

Username contradicts.

:pac:

Bubbaclaus

In the same way there is a age cut off on the young in voting (18), I think there should be an upper age limit applied to referendums.

buried

The auld 'divide and conquer' manoeuvre

Old vs Young
Men vs Women
West vs Muslims
Black vs White

Soon it'll be 10 yr olds vs newly born Infants

Calahonda52

Del2005 wrote: »

Until young people get organised and more importantly vote then yes Old people matter more. Our political system, and the UK, is built on getting votes and old people vote so they get what they want.

Look at how many thousands came out when they tried to take the medical card off them, do you think that many working young people who've had more taken from them in USC/pension levy than any old person, could have gotten as big a turnout or about face from the government?

When they want to vote the young come out as shown in the marriage referendum or what ever it was called.

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

Everybody should be equal BUT I understand the problem with the Brexit decision; that older people who don't have a long life expectancy have basically sold younger people down the river for the decades to come (because of outdated views about what "Great Britain" is in the 21st Century).

The evidence does not point to this, it points to the services they avail of for them selves, their kids and grandkids being overrun by the folk in Nigel's poster

A persons worth isn't calculated using age alone. Otherwise babies would be worthless because they chew up resources and contribute nothing, and yet that isn't how we measure their worth at all. Potential is the unseen value in young people, experience the unseen value in the older.


FWIW, my grandparents are worth roughly eleventy billion regular people of any age - because I say so and worth is relative. No pun intended.

Shint0

In the UK at least it was the grey pound which helped lift them out of the recession as that cohort have larger disposable income and increased consumer spending power which is often associated with the mid-20s to mid 30s age group. So they can't be ignored as not contributing to the economy and just simply being a drain even if they might be higher users of the health service because of age-related illnesses.

Here in the health service I think older people can be treated shabbily and considered bed blockers. It's far easier to discharge an older person who might have a long term illness to free up bed spaces as their prognosis can be viewed as poor so they need strong advocates to represent them and give them some dignity at the end of their lives.

jackinthemix94

Calahonda52 wrote: »

When they want to vote the young come out as shown in the marriage referendum or what ever it was called.



The evidence does not point to this, it points to the services they avail of for them selves, their kids and grandkids being overrun by the folk in Nigel's poster

BS, the reason services are becoming threadbare in the UK is because they have a Tory government that isn't increasing public spending proportionately to growth in population - particularly in the South.

Stigura

Funny. I genuinely thought it said, " Do old people natter as much as younger people? "

And I thought to myself, 'Yeah. I'm a right chatter head.'

FizzleSticks

This post has been deleted.

Cath54

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

In the same way there is a age cut off on the young in voting (18), I think there should be an upper age limit applied to referendums.

Are you joking?

wakka12

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

In the same way there is a age cut off on the young in voting (18), I think there should be an upper age limit applied to referendums.

Any reason why there should be? Theyve contributed to the economy their entire lives, they deserve to have a say in how the society theyre still living in is governed. Even if theyre going to die the day after the referendum

Eramen

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

Everybody should be equal BUT I understand the problem with the Brexit decision; that older people who don't have a long life expectancy have basically sold younger people down the river for the decades to come (because of outdated views about what "Great Britain" is in the 21st Century).

Hold up. Only 25% of under 30's bothered their arse to vote in the first place. Therefore they've no excuse really. Huge swathes of them weren't concerned about the issue at all but still like to complain after the fact.

In the end only they themselves are to blame, though I'm sure many would have also voted to exit the EU if they had originally bothered to vote.

Eramen

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

In the same way there is a age cut off on the young in voting (18), I think there should be an upper age limit applied to referendums.

You would simply be called a 'fascist' if I were a holier-than-thou leftist. You're lucky I'm not. :pac:

Bubbaclaus

Cath54 wrote: »

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

In the same way there is a age cut off on the young in voting (18), I think there should be an upper age limit applied to referendums.

Are you joking?

Nope. Take the recent Brexit vote as an example. A 17 year old had no say on the future of the UK and the vast implications it will have to their life. A 97 year old, who will never feel the effects of Brexit had a say.

Bubbaclaus

Eramen wrote: »

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

Everybody should be equal BUT I understand the problem with the Brexit decision; that older people who don't have a long life expectancy have basically sold younger people down the river for the decades to come (because of outdated views about what "Great Britain" is in the 21st Century).

Hold up. Only 25% of under 30's bothered their arse to vote in the first place. Therefore they've no excuse really. Huge swathes of them weren't concerned about the issue at all but still like to complain after the fact.

In the end only they themselves are to blame, though I'm sure many would have also voted to exit the EU.

Where are you getting the 25% figure from? That sounds like it was including the under 18s that weren't allowed vote, which wouldn't make any sense as a statistic.

The_Valeyard

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Nope. Take the recent Brexit vote as an example. A 17 year old had no say on the future of the UK and the vast implications it will have to their life. A 97 year old, who will never feel the effects of Brexit had a say.

A 97 year old who has probably worked his entire life, paid his taxes and contributed to the social and economical success of the country. A person who probably cares and loves their kids, grandkids and possibly great grandkids and wishes a good future for them. Of course they get a say and vote.

jackinthemix94

The_Valeyard wrote: »

A 97 year old who has probably worked his entire life, paid his taxes and contributed to the social and economical success of the country. A person who probably cares and loves their kids, grandkids and possibly great grandkids and wishes a good future for them. Of course they get a say and vote.

All these people "wish a good future" and yet voted out. Rubbish. They voted with their outdated, parochial mentalities that have no place in modern society. Utterly selfish.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Yes they're every bit as important

Capt'n Midnight

Pensioners will never have it so good again. While some are in poverty a large chunk of them have defined benefit pensions and no debts. Most young people today could only dream of having that sort of disposable income while paying off a mortgage and pension that would have a similar payout.

The_Valeyard

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

All these people "wish a good future" and yet voted out. Rubbish. They voted with their outdated, parochial mentalities that have no place in modern society. Utterly selfish.

So, they voted in a way you did not like.

Therefore they are outdated, parochial mentalities??

No place in modern society?

That's some scary eugenic thinking right there.

Eramen

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Pensioners will never have it so good again. While some are in poverty a large chunk of them have defined benefit pensions and no debts. Most young people today could only dream of having that sort of disposable income while paying off a mortgage and pension that would have a similar payout.

Yes but wait a sec..

Most young people last year bound themselves up wholesale in a relatively unimportant 'Vote Yes' campaign. 'Unimportant' I say because said minority group equaling a few % of the population total already long-held the said equal rights for which they supposedly campaigned.

However according to CSO released this year 65% of people in the state under 35 will never be able to afford their own home, ever, period..

So where are the young people rallying around this cause in the same fashion? A cause that certainly does not revolve around a small, pampered minority, but a downright majority, including themselves directly.. Is owning your own property so one can build a life not 'edgy' and 'equality-themed' enough to fight and stand up for? Young people don't seem to be interested because RTE / The Journal etc isn't telling them what to think. Blaming or begrudging the oldies is kind of weak tbh.

Young people have proven they can 'act' if they really want to, but sadly no self-righteous moral high-horse is on offer so they couldn't be bothered. And so it's back to life-long renting. So much for our generation being the most 'educated' yet.

And yes, I'm under 30, so don't think I'm some OB. We seem to fight everyone else's battle except for our own.. it's the national pastime.

foggy_lad

Where would any of those younger people be if not for the efforts of older people who brought them into the world and tried to raise them with a bit of respect and compassion, it seems a lot of them failed with their children!

The_Mac

jackinthemix94 wrote: »

All these people "wish a good future" and yet voted out. Rubbish. They voted with their outdated, parochial mentalities that have no place in modern society. Utterly selfish.

Good thing when you're old you definitely won't vote, because you realise that your voice won't matter in the world, right?

Widdershins

As a young woman I find the attitude that emerged after brexit to be repulsive andembarassing. This question should not need to be asked. Decades of experience and wisdom is underrated.

Chuchote

Only 34% of the young (age 18-24, or was it -34) came out to vote in Britain's Brexit vote. They can feck off with their blame.

People who have paid for their homes and lived in them all their lives being expected to move: fine, remove the stamp duty for them, and give them a subvention for the costs of selling – the percentage paid to an estate agent, the cost of painting and sanding and landscaping and tiling and fixing all those little things that build up in a house over many years. Otherwise they'll lose something like €60,000 by moving, with no advantage to themselves.

I notice that the same people who are asking for the old to sell up and leave their houses don't have the same passionate desire for rich couples who live in enormous Georgian houses with only Cúan and Síofra, and the maid coming in three times a week, to move out and downsize. Wonder why that is.

Chuchote

Most pensioners are throwing what little money they have into their children's yawning debts, minding grandchildren, supporting children, paying mortgages, paying creches.
And be kind enough not to conflate a civil service pension with the State pension.
This nasty envy - in many cases of the poorest - shows a particularly unpleasant side of (a few of) a later generation.

Ken.

Mod-Paddy is a rereg troll so all posts and replies deleted. Sorry if it breaks up the flow.

Stigura

ken wrote: »

Mod-Paddy is a rereg troll .....

Damn! Ye took the thought right out of my head!

posturingpat

A work colleague of mine wanted to go to a 3 day week so she could spend time caring for her elderly ill mother. Her husband wouldn't allow her do this apparently citing the kids future as the most important thing and her going to a 3 day week would be detrimental to their savings for kids college fees(oldest kids about 5).
I found this quite disgusting, first of all the husband's got a really high paying job so they're never going to be short a few Bob but more importantly as this thread suggests some/lots of people don't value the elderly at the same level as other age groups. I for one found my colleagues husband's behavior to be quite frankly disgraceful and told her as much. How can people be so cold and put money ahead of people you love? Old or young.

Bubbaclaus

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/09/young-people-referendum-turnout-brexit-twice-as-high

I find it bizarre that older people are blamed because they were more careful with their money than we were. They went through Ireland of the 50s-90's when Ireland was poor. Recession, economic issues, dodgy governments, union strikes, etc.. and yet they managed to put away savings, pay off mortgages, and remain mostly debt free. Many of the employment rights that we enjoy so easily today come from their fights or misery...

And now that the world is dealing with the after-effects of a credit craze gone nuts, people are criticising them. No offense to anyone directly, but its immature temper tantrum behavior. We (not pensioners - although some did) created the current economic climate. We involved ourselves with credit cards, easy mortgages, etc. We did this.

I worked for over a decade in Credit control... and debt collection (leasing agreements). Most customers signed up for products without reading the actual contract first. Amazinginly enough few customers that needed to be tracked down or chase were from that older age group. Instead it was people my own age or younger.

Take some responsibiility for the state of Ireland... rather than passing the buck for all the crap... and wallowing in all the nice things that older people achieved before we were out of nappies.

andekwarhola

All citizens should matter. There's so no ranking but obviously the very old, like the very young, are usually more vulnerable and deserve to be treated on the basis of that.

Always find the sneering about the 'grey vote' a bit baffling. As if most of the electorate doesn't vote along self-interested lines and all adults don't have the right to vote.

Glenster

Deleted User wrote: »

I find it bizarre that older people are blamed because they were more careful with their money than we were.

Were they?

Lets say the seeds of the financial crisis of 2007 were sown in the period 1997 to 2007, between 20 and ten years ago.

Anyone in their early 30s now was only of school age when it happened.

Anyone in their early 40's were in their 20's in this period we can discount them because the average age for a first time buyer was 29.

Anyone now in their early 50's (Old people?) may have bought their first and maybe second house. (5 years later is the average in the UK)

Its those people in their early 60's and above who were heavily involved in the buy to let market in the 90's/00's (i.e. those who were past buying their first home and were releasing a few years of equity in their homes to buy second properties).

Ipso facto the financial crisis is the fault of the Old.

Not all the old, but if you had to put an age group on it......

Alf Veedersane

The bankers were old.


QED.

Maximus Alexander

It's funny how so many under-30s don't seem to realise that one day, if they're lucky, they're going to be the old people. When that time comes they're going to feel pretty stupid if they've spent their younger years trying to strip away their own rights.

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

The bankers were old.


QED.

Many of those doing the speculating across all markets including property were under 50. Hardly old in my eyes.

jobless

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

It's funny how so many under-30s don't seem to realise that one day, if they're lucky, they're going to be the old people. When that time comes they're going to feel pretty stupid if they've spent their younger years trying to strip away their own rights.

exactly, i think i lot of people < 30 think they'll never grow old! ...
If they put themselves in the shoes of that old person that they will become then maybe they would think different...

like the guy mentioned above who wont let his wife look after her mother... i hope karma comes back and bites him in the ass when he is old and gets treated like that

Glenster

Glenster wrote: »

Were they?

Lets say the seeds of the financial crisis of 2007 were sown in the period 1997 to 2007, between 20 and ten years ago.

Anyone in their early 30s now was only of school age when it happened.

Anyone in their early 40's were in their 20's in this period we can discount them because the average age for a first time buyer was 29.

I bought my first home at 25 almost 26. I'd been working 6 years at that point, and just got my first management position. I got the mortgage myself with the help of a 15k deposit from my parents, renovated the place and resold the place two years later at a profit... then bought another place with a larger mortgage.

It was easy as hell to get a mortgage then. that would have been in 2002/2003. I should have sold the place two years later again.... but I thought I'd squeeze a little more money from the property market. I was wrong. And yet, I got a mortgage that was within my means to repay... And I fully take responsibility for my choice then... or shouldn't I?

The problem is that you're assigning responsbility for the crash on everyone of a certain age group equally... but it didn't work like that. Many people bought or received mortgages within their means (without excessive credit)... many more did not.. and many of those that did not, were actually quite young comparitively speaking.

I'm sure you'll be able to provide loads of statistics to show how I'm wrong. No need. I'll continue to go with what I saw from my family, from my friends and from my colleagues of that time.

Anyone now in their early 50's (Old people?) may have bought their first and maybe second house. (5 years later is the average in the UK)

Really? interesting. Didn't know that. Most of my friends were buying a house at the time I was selling my first... but not because they couldn't but rather a different appreciation towards wealth investment. They played stocks rather than buying a property. They also bought a house far beyond their ability to repay because they believed they would be able to resell... alas most are still paying that mortgage or have lost it. But then, I'd suggest that was their own responsibility.

Its those people in their early 60's and above who were heavily involved in the buy to let market in the 90's/00's (i.e. those who were past buying their first home and were releasing a few years of equity in their homes to buy second properties).

Fair enough. My parents remortgaged their home (they'd paid off their mortgage in the late 80's) to help my sister buy a home, and also to buy another property for renting. They've since repaid their mortgage but are still stuck with the house (mortgage) they bought, which they rent out.

Most of my extended family (parents age group) are in a similar situation.

Ipso facto the financial crisis is the fault of the Old.

Hardly. Some of the old are partially responsible. Just as many from my generation are responsible. The babies of that era aren't responsible for the banking crash itself... but many of them are voters or taxpayers now... and many are responsible for what happened afterwards.

Not all the old, but if you had to put an age group on it......

If i had to put an age group, I'd say 25-50... of those who were working, paying taxes, and capable of passing the flimsy requirements for credit that the banks were providing.

Are some of the old responsible...? yup. But then personally I think anyone that was 18 years old from 2000 was responsible. Myself included. I didn't object strongly enough to those muppets getting into government, didn't object loudly enough with the credit craze, and I didn't sell my house when I should have.

Glenster

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm sure you'll be able to provide loads of statistics to show how I'm wrong. No need. I'll continue to go with what I saw from my family, from my friends and from my colleagues of that time.

We're clearly coming at this from cross purposes, I was thinking about if we have to assign blame who is the most responsible and thought about it and looked it up so I could provide (admittedly flimsy) facts to back it up.

I cant really compete with anecdotes


If i had to put an age group, I'd say 25-50... of those who were working, paying taxes, and capable of passing the flimsy requirements for credit that the banks were providing.

Are some of the old responsible...? yup. But then personally I think anyone that was 18 years old from 2000 was responsible.

The people who bought their own houses weren't the cause of the downturn, it was buy to let purchasers who (I would assume) are older who caused the downturn. It was speculation rather than a desire for home ownership that was the issue. As such, i think its unfair to lump in 25 year olds (who statistically didn't even have a house at the time) with 40+ year olds who had the capital and were the ones buying properties at an inflated rate.

That's not to say I think we should necessarily assign blame, or punish those people, who were just trying to live their lives, who caused the crisis

Myself included. I didn't object strongly enough to those muppets getting into government, didn't object loudly enough with the credit craze, and I didn't sell my house when I should have.

a

Alf Veedersane

Deleted User wrote: »

Many of those doing the speculating across all markets including property were under 50. Hardly old in my eyes.

I wasn't being serious.

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I wasn't being serious.

Glenster

Glenster wrote: »

a

I think you're forgetting that those 25 year olds were making quite a bit of money in early 2002/2003. The economy was golden. Salaries were rising, and if you weren't spending like crazy (unlike some), you could easily afford the deposit and a hefty chunk of the initial mortgage. I paid off more than a quarter of my mortgage in the years just before the crash...

My objection is this whole assigning of blame. In my eyes, we were all responsible (except for the kiddies at the time).. So, I don't like this idea of assigning blame to the older generations.