The Cellar - View Single Post

BigV · 02-05-2008, 05:59 PM

Heh.

Sure, that's one way to measure a lifetime. But, having only read the article and not the study nor anything about their metrics, I have some *serious* problems with the headlining "conclusions".

For example, they give a very precise sounding number, $417,000, as the health care cost for a thin person who lives longer, but no reference at all to the other side of the ledger of the same person's life. Do they not earn more or longer? Or not? What of the economics of their lives? Another spin on the (stupid sounding) conclusion is that these same people are the Energizer Bunnies of the economy, unstoppable engines of employment for the growing health care sector. Yay old (really old) people, you're keeping us employed!

Riddikulus!

02-05-2008, 05:59 PM	#2
BigV Goon Squad Leader Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,063	Heh. Sure, that's one way to measure a lifetime. But, having only read the article and not the study nor anything about their metrics, I have some serious problems with the headlining "conclusions". For example, they give a very precise sounding number, $417,000, as the health care cost for a thin person who lives longer, but no reference at all to the other side of the ledger of the same person's life. Do they not earn more or longer? Or not? What of the economics of their lives? Another spin on the (stupid sounding) conclusion is that these same people are the Energizer Bunnies of the economy, unstoppable engines of employment for the growing health care sector. Yay old (really old) people, you're keeping us employed! Riddikulus! __________________ Be Just and Fear Not.