Ageing population

[Bellcose]

Could i then claim that women are a burden on society

Probably since that group generally have fewer financial resources and they require - and deserve - society's support.

 

[divs4ever]

Probably since that group generally have fewer financial resources and they require - and deserve - society's support.

that would depend on how much their partner's super has been looted before she is entitled to the remainder

we have governments fixated on stripping assets from the recently deceased ( and maybe promise to help those legally entitled to to inheritance )

 

[sptrawler]

Well, to me it seems pretty straightforward that as the boomers retire, and need more and more care, we not only need the same number of workers to do all the jobs the boomers used to do, plus a certain number of carers to care for the aging boomers.

I don’t see how the math works with out increasing the workforce through immigration.

What solution do you suggest.

Maybe you and the missus could have a couple of kids?

And before you have a go at me, we had 4 kids and have 8 grandkids, so I've done my best, but my backs given up.

 

[Value Collector]

Maybe you and the missus could have a couple of kids?

No need, the global population is still growing, it’s easier to bring in a trained dentist than put me through the hell of raising one from scratch, .

Not to mention that I am of the opinion that as we get more and more automation, a smaller global population is probably a good thing.

I mean when you were born the global population was probably about 3 Billion, would it be that bad if in a world where robots can provide us most of the labour needed to produce all the products and services we need the population slowly started heading down from 9 Billion back to around 3 Billion.

Who knows in 100 years people might even stop ageing, and the death rate drops to close to zero, and we rely on a super low birth rate, where families just have 1 or none babies and wait till their 50’s to have their first , but in the mean time the global birth rate is positive, no need to rush into having babies.

 

[JohnDe]

I'm not worried, other than the obsession of the left and the socialists to try and scare people into believing their mad opinions.

Human ingenuity has solved all our problems for thousands of years, and it will continue to do so in the future. However, it is also that human factor that tries to chain us into false beliefs of doom and destruction. Inventing new ways to put fear into our children, to tax us into equal pay, to empower governments and reduce our free will.

I'm an optimist, we'll all get out of this just fine. As long as we do our own planning and saving.

The future is so bright, I have to wear sunglasses.

Rise of the Machines: Will Robots Become the Future of Aged Care?

In a stunning display of technological advancement, Tesla recently unveiled its Optimus Gen 2 humanoid robot at the ‘We Robot’ event in California.

Designed to help with everyday tasks around the house, Optimus comes with an anticipated price tag of just $20,000 to $30,000. With capabilities ranging from serving drinks to dancing and holding conversations, Elon Musk claims that these robots may eventually become household companions and even assist with tasks like walking the dog, babysitting children, and mowing the lawn.

While the current model is not yet autonomous, being controlled remotely by human operators through VR systems, the range of possibilities these robots offer is expanding rapidly. Beyond household uses, many are beginning to consider how these humanoid robots could transform industries like aged care and home care, improving services and addressing workforce shortages.

Robots in Aged Care​

With the rise of ageing populations and a growing strain on care systems, robots like Optimus could play a significant role in aged care.

Residential care homes are struggling with staff shortages, while increasing regulations demand more personalised care. Robots could offer a solution by assisting human staff with physical and repetitive tasks, allowing them to focus on higher-quality interactions with residents.

Some ways that humanoid robots could be used in aged care include:

1. Physical Support: Robots could help with lifting and transferring residents from beds or chairs, reducing the risk of injury to both residents and staff.
2. Monitoring and Alerts: Equipped with sensors, robots could monitor residents’ vitals or detect falls, alerting human caregivers when assistance is needed.
3. Engagement Activities: Robots may also participate in social activities, such as leading light exercises, singing sessions, or playing games with residents—activities essential to maintaining mental well-being in older adults.

Tesla’s Optimus Gen 2 even demonstrated its ability to serve drinks and interact with guests, suggesting that in future, robots could perform hospitality functions in care homes, such as serving meals and ensuring residents are hydrated.

Applications for Home Care: Enhancing Independent Living​

The use of robots in home care settings also offers exciting opportunities, especially for seniors and individuals with disabilities aiming to maintain their independence. With rising labour costs in the care sector, a robot priced at $20K to $30K could be a cost-effective option to supplement care services.

Potential uses in home care include:

1. Assistance with Daily Tasks: Robots could help clients with household chores, such as vacuuming, laundry, and meal preparation, relieving some of the burdens on human carers.
2. Companionship: Social isolation is a significant issue for many elderly people. With the capability to hold conversations, future iterations of robots could provide companionship and emotional support, especially during the hours when human carers are not present.
3. Medication Management: Robots could assist in reminding clients to take medications on time or even dispense them, ensuring adherence to treatment plans.
4. Telepresence: Equipped with cameras and remote operation, these robots could also facilitate virtual family visits or connect clients with healthcare providers, offering an extra layer of support in emergency situations.

Augmenting, Not Replacing, the Workforce​

While robots like Tesla’s Optimus are advancing rapidly, they are not meant to replace human carers, at least not yet.

The most promising future lies in collaboration between robots and human workers, combining the strength, efficiency, and precision of robots with the empathy, creativity, and adaptability of human carers.

Robots can take over repetitive or physically demanding tasks, preventing burnout and injury among aged care staff.

This frees up workers to spend more time engaging with residents, delivering emotional and personalised care, which is critical for improving quality of life in aged care settings. Moreover, such an approach could also make aged care roles more appealing, as carers would focus less on routine tasks and more on meaningful interaction.

Challenges and Ethical Considerations​

Despite the potential benefits, integrating robots into care settings raises important questions. How will residents react to robots in personal care roles? Will there be resistance from workers concerned about job security?

Moreover, care providers must ensure that privacy and dignity are respected, especially when robots are involved in personal or sensitive activities.

There are also concerns about reliability and maintenance. A malfunctioning robot could cause delays in care, with serious consequences. Therefore, any rollout of robots in aged care would need to be carefully managed, with appropriate oversight, training, and backup plans in place.

New Frontiers​

As the potential for robotics in aged care looms closer, we find ourselves at a critical juncture: an opportunity for the sector to finally embrace technology in ways it has historically resisted.

Aged care has often lagged behind other industries in adopting modern technological solutions, relying on outdated systems that can hinder efficiency and quality of care. For instance, traditional call bells remain little more than rudimentary buzzers, offering no insight into the urgency or context of a resident’s request. Furthermore, in some facilities, data collection is still a manual process involving paper and pen, making it difficult to track vital information efficiently and effectively.

Incorporating robotics into the sector could not only streamline operations but also encourage a cultural shift towards innovation and adaptability. The future of aged care might well involve a blend of human and robotic care, where technology serves to enhance well-being and maintain dignity.

As Tesla and other robotics companies push the boundaries of what robots can do, the aged care sector has the opportunity to lead the way in adopting these new tools, setting a standard for compassionate and efficient care in the 21st century.

 

[investtrader]

Geez there are some wankers on here ...

 

[divs4ever]

I'm an optimist, we'll all get out of this just fine. As long as we do our own planning and saving.

that is a big IF . the current trend is to blindly indoctrinate ( or be indoctrinated )

i have always done my own way ( even before 5 ) but others .. some are not so creative or courageous

this looks like a solid test of Darwin's theory coming up

but interesting times create opportunity .. for some

 

[Value Hunter]

Well that’s one solution I guess, I don’t think enough people are actually doing that to make a dent though.

The government can encourage people to retire overseas through various pension payment reforms and tax reforms. We have a lot of dumb policies in Australia putting restrictions on certain people receiving their pensions if they reside full time overseas. Also there are tax considerations. We need to put in place policies to encourage rather than discourage overseas retirement.

 

[Value Collector]

The government can encourage people to retire overseas through various pension payment reforms and tax reforms. We have a lot of dumb policies in Australia putting restrictions on certain people receiving their pensions if they reside full time overseas. Also there are tax considerations. We need to put in place policies to encourage rather than discourage overseas retirement.

It’s funny, on one thread I have people trying to tell me the government should incentivise unprofitable steel mills to keep the economy strong, and on this one that we should incentivise retirees to move over seas with their pension spending .

 

[Value Hunter]

I agree there's a link between the two, that bringing in more people in response to the aging population is what's occurring, but I'll question what's really going on beneath the surface.

If we turn the clock back a few decades then just about every work task was harder in terms of the human effort and labour hours required. Anything from radio broadcasting to sorting mail to office administration to house framing, it's all become less labour intensive today due to technology, improved work methods and so on. There's probably an exception but I really can't think of one where there hasn't been at least some improvement. Even driving a bus now takes less labour since conductors were done away with many years ago.

At the same time we've abandoned what was a vey substantial chunk of activity, that is manufacturing, and that's now almost all offshore.

Also at the same time pretty much every mechanical and electrical device has seen as huge drop in maintenance requirements. First because it's solid state and simply doesn't require routine maintenance, second because if it breaks then it's replaced rather than repaired.

Add those all up and a huge portion of work that used to be done is either gone completely or is a shadow of what it once was.

Meanwhile there's about 14.5 million people employed and the workforce participation rate has trended up over time, now being about 67% versus 65% a decade ago and about 60% 40 years ago.

So my question is where's all that labour actually going? What work is actually being done?

I don't mean the workers are sitting around playing cards all day but I mean what, exactly, is being done?

Something doesn't seem right there. Either there's a huge output of something that I've failed to notice or a lot of the workers aren't actually producing an end product, whatever, that someone actually wants to buy.

We created a lot of what anthropologist David Graeber referred to as bull**** jobs. And its not just him saying it. Mark Andreeson who is a top silicon valley venture capitalist talked about how 50% of Google's employees do nothing productive and how many other big tech companies are the same. There is an old interview with Carl Icahn talking about how he pretty much fired the whole head office of a company he took over and it operated just fine (in fact even better) without the head office people. And that was decades ago, its much worse now. Elon Musk fired 80% of twitter employees and the company functioned just fine without all of their bloat.

How many "people and culture" staff do we need? How many "diversity, equity and inclusion" consultants do we need? How many useless paper pushing middle management employees do we need? How many people in a company writing pointless procedure and company policy documents (that people sign off on because its obligatory but never actually read)?

Yes we need far fewer employees to do actual work but a lot of that gain in productivity has been soaked up by wasteful bloat. For example if with all the software advances 5 engineers today can do the work that 10 engineers did 40 years ago those 5 jobs have been replaced with 5 paper pushing useless management employees. In my experience for the most part management in large corporations and the government are just a relic of the Neo-fuedal system. They have very little to do with actual production activities.

HR employees, management employees, government employees, safety and compliance employees, administrative employees, etc these are all areas of enormous and ever increasing waste and bloat. Sure you need a certain amount of people doing these jobs but in general there is a lot of bloat. These days most companies have relatively minimal bloat in the front line production/sales/research and development activities. The bloat is mostly in the ancillary stuff.

 

[Value Hunter]

It’s funny, on one thread I have people trying to tell me the government should incentivise unprofitable steel mills to keep the economy strong, and on this one that we should incentivise retirees to move over seas with their pension spending .

Pensioners cost the healthcare system a lot. Better to let them pay for their own healthcare/aged care overseas.

 

[Value Hunter]

We created a lot of what anthropologist David Graeber referred to as bull**** jobs. And its not just him saying it. Mark Andreeson who is a top silicon valley venture capitalist talked about how 50% of Google's employees do nothing productive and how many other big tech companies are the same. There is an old interview with Carl Icahn talking about how he pretty much fired the whole head office of a company he took over and it operated just fine (in fact even better) without the head office people. And that was decades ago, its much worse now. Elon Musk fired 80% of twitter employees and the company functioned just fine without all of their bloat.

How many "people and culture" staff do we need? How many "diversity, equity and inclusion" consultants do we need? How many useless paper pushing middle management employees do we need? How many people in a company writing pointless procedure and company policy documents (that people sign off on because its obligatory but never actually read)?

Yes we need far fewer employees to do actual work but a lot of that gain in productivity has been soaked up by wasteful bloat. For example if with all the software advances 5 engineers today can do the work that 10 engineers did 40 years ago those 5 jobs have been replaced with 5 paper pushing useless management employees. In my experience for the most part management in large corporations and the government are just a relic of the Neo-fuedal system. They have very little to do with actual production activities.

HR employees, management employees, government employees, safety and compliance employees, administrative employees, etc these are all areas of enormous and ever increasing waste and bloat. Sure you need a certain amount of people doing these jobs but in general there is a lot of bloat. These days most companies have relatively minimal bloat in the front line production/sales/research and development activities. The bloat is mostly in the ancillary stuff.

These days when you join large company the amount of documents you have to sign and various apps and accounts and logins you have to have is mind-boggling. A perfect example of the waste and bloat added over the years.

 

[Value Collector]

Pensioners cost the healthcare system a lot. Better to let them pay for their own healthcare/aged care overseas.

I don’t know for sure, but I reckon on average retirees spending would be supporting enough economic activity in Australia to offset the medical costs, I mean even some of the medical costs are recovered through taxation on the wages etc of the the medical staff.

To send 100% of a retirees spending off shore, just to reduce the cost of their medical bills, if probably not a net win.

 

[Value Hunter]

Now, we build houses with all sorts of added features like air conditioning, solar, pools, landscaping etc and want to have coffee shops, take away, food delivery services.

Its less of an advancement than it sounds. Average quality of houses is lower today than it was 50 years ago despite all of the shiny knick knacks added over the years. Give me a sturdy 1950s double brick home over a newly built home any day of the week.

As for food yes there are more restaurants, take away options etc but basic food quality in terms of the underlying ingredients has gone down substantially over time. Everything is a lot more more mass produced and chemical, etc than it was 30 or 40 years ago. Not to mention 40 years ago a lot of families could survive on a single income before house prices went to the moon.

 

[Value Collector]

Its less of an advancement than it sounds. Average quality of houses is lower today than it was 50 years ago despite all of the shiny knick knacks added over the years. Give me a sturdy 1950s double brick home over a newly built home any day of the week.

Does this average 1950’s house have a flushing toilet and running hot water? Most of them didn’t, and are you going to keep the leaded paint and asbestos too?

I think you might be looking with nostalgia, and ignoring all the improvements you take for granted,

I mean literally just today I really enjoyed having wifi, solar electricity, air con, a microwave, big screen TV, mobile phone, cordless drill, dishwasher, automatic garage doors, flushing indoor toilet, bathroom with a shower, car with aircon, streaming movies, a PlayStation etc etc none of that was available in the 1950’s homes.

And that is all just today, I really wouldn’t enjoy that 1950’s home, even with double brick walls.

 

[Value Hunter]

And that is all just today, I really wouldn’t enjoy that 1950’s home, even with double brick walls.

You can still live in a 1950s double brick home today and have wifi and aircon and modern appliances in your 1950s home as many people are currently doing. I am not saying that nothing is improved. I'm just saying progress is a mixed bag. A lot of things got better while at the same time a lot of things got worse also.

 

[divs4ever]

It’s funny, on one thread I have people trying to tell me the government should incentivise unprofitable steel mills to keep the economy strong, and on this one that we should incentivise retirees to move over seas with their pension spending .

maybe IF we produced more finished products in Australia , we could sell more , locally , not just chase export sales

steel can be rather useful in a local economy , as can copper , aluminum , timber etc. etc .

incentivize , that is a cute way of describing wealthy retirees trying to escape the next tax/asset grab

 

[Value Collector]

You can still live in a 1950s double brick home today and have wifi and aircon and modern appliances in your 1950s home as many people are currently doing. I am not saying that nothing is improved. I'm just saying progress is a mixed bag. A lot of things got better while at the same time a lot of things got worse also.

Yeah, but my point is that things have improved and our houses have a lot more modern conveniences in them now. If you simply add all those things to the 1950’s house you obviously raise its cost.

I think on balance things get better, the good old days weren’t that good, we can cherry pick some nostalgic items from the past, but it doesn’t compare to all the good stuff we have now.

It’s like I was just in Europe, and can honestly say we don’t build buildings now like we used to, but when I visited that beautiful church and admired its beauty, I also remember I flew across the world in a matter of hours, on a plane, and they couldn’t build those planes in the year they built the church, so yes stone masons aren’t as common, but we have aircraft engineers building passenger jets now.

And I choose planes over churches

 

[Value Collector]

maybe IF we produced more finished products in Australia , we could sell more , locally , not just chase export sales

steel can be rather useful in a local economy , as can copper , aluminum , timber etc. etc .

incentivize , that is a cute way of describing wealthy retirees trying to escape the next tax/asset grab

It’s better to make the things that you can sell at high profit margins, and buy the things you buy cheaper.

We know this instinctively when it comes to managing our own households, we generally pick a job we know we can make the most money on and focus on that, and then buy all the other produce we need.

If each household tried to produce 100% of their consumption, rather than focus on one thing they do best, their standard of living drops.

It’s the same for a country, especially a small one.

 

[divs4ever]

Does this average 1950’s house have a flushing toilet and running hot water? Most of them didn’t, and are you going to keep the leaded paint and asbestos too?

I think you might be looking with nostalgia, and ignoring all the improvements you take for granted,

I mean literally just today I really enjoyed having wifi, solar electricity, air con, a microwave, big screen TV, mobile phone, cordless drill, dishwasher, automatic garage doors, flushing indoor toilet, bathroom with a shower, car with aircon, streaming movies, a PlayStation etc etc none of that was available in the 1950’s homes.

And that is all just today, I really wouldn’t enjoy that 1950’s home, even with double brick walls.

View attachment 188565

Gough Whitlam ????

in Brisbane it was then Lord Mayor Clem Jones and what is more he did NOT take a salary ( he had a real estate/property develop business at the same time , so any improvement in land/house values in general echoed in his company profits )

and BTW Gough Whitlam was elected Prime Minister in 1972 .. i remember that very very well ( it gave me choices on whether i was going to be involved in the Vietnam War ( he cancelled conscription .. and the potential of being involved in a very brutal war )

Clem gave us sewerage , bitumen road , concrete gutters for road drainage , a sewerage system , a rare moment of true progress from a ALP politician

but yes out-back toilets , dirt roads , unsealed gutters ,and many other amenities were a feature of Brisbane at the start of his leadership ( even water-tanks were reasonably common in city allotments )