Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Galapagos Islands -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (5331)	10/7/2002 6:25:38 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57110

I think there would be....as there have been in the past gains of life expectancy. The last five to ten percent of life, whether it be of a car or a human or a toaster, is going to have its issues, unless the life is destroyed by a sudden or catastrophic event. When people died routinely at 50 (Babe Ruth, for example, was born in 1895 and died in 1948), the last few years often sucked (his last few years were spent becoming progressively unable to talk and wracked by pain as the cancer overtook him). Now they routinely die at 80 or later, and the last few years are often a pain. Harry Caray, to use a St. Louis example in honor of the Cards playoff run, made it to nearly 80 even though his liver absorbed many times more Budweiser than its design limit. But the years before that can in many instances be quite rewarding and relatively comfortable. Harry was boisterous til around age 70, when strokes and alcoholism finally began to wear him down, and he started to call the Cubs the Cardinals on occasion. I would not be surprised if my grandchildren live to be 120 and continue to function pretty well up until 105 and 110. And somewhere in there is gonna be a great investment opportunity or two.