Interesting that in 1951 one of the prevailing issues in our society was what to do about our aging population. In the midst of this discussion the question is brought up what’s going to happen to the people in 1951, who are considered at the time to be the young ones, in 1975?
Although, even in 1951 the aging population didn’t look the same as the aging population of 1900 – each generation seems to live different lives based on whatever advances are taking place with reference to how much longer we all seem to be living. In 1900 people just aged faster – lifestyles – work – stress (we called it something else then) – and they died sooner. Sixty-Five in 1900 was considered ancient by comparison, even to 1951. The sheer number of people hitting 65 and above indicate we’re living longer now; sometimes a lot longer
But the question still remains; what do we do about them? Do they have to retire at sixty-five? And after sixty-five, the relative inactivity would appear to be a major factor in eventual death.
The big difference between the argument about getting old gracefully in 1951 as opposed to 2024 is that there are a lot more safety nets constructed in 2024 than there were in 1951 – for one thing, it is now illegal to ask how old you are. Age discrimination lawsuits have been clogging the dockets of many a court in recent decades. Even though one can get around it simply by asking the applicant about education and dates attending high-school. The numbers quickly add up and tell a story all on their own, all hidden in plain sight.
The panelists on this discussion bring up points that would never be brought up now – for example; saying retail customers would rather see a younger person behind the counter than an older one – even though it’s supposed to be an area that falls under the aegis of Health and Human Services – you can’t just come right out and say it to anyone – but there is an invisible implication. Job resumés look great on paper until the in-person interview happens and then suddenly the job no longer exists or the “direction changes” – easy outs and workarounds.
If anything the discrimination against older workers is worse now than it was in 1951 because you can’t go right out and ask someone their age you are more or less forces to find other ways.
It was shaping up to being a problem then, it’s a problem now. It’s fascinating to hear how the subject was tackled in 1951 – then as now, the older population was considered baggage of annoyance – lovable baggage in some cases – but inevitable. It’s part of what happens when we stay on the planet long enough; waiting it out between birth and eternity. Gonna happen to all of us someday.
Just like it was happening on July 22, 1951.
Buckle up.
