If you think older people have 'no skin in the game', you are severely underestimating the value that most older folk place on the quality of life that will be enjoyed by our children, grandchildren, etc.
It sounds like something a youngster would say. I bet they are in their 20/30s.
Not to mention, 60 is pretty damn young. You're cutting off people in the prime of their maturity, especially with longer lifespans. Teddy Roosevelt died at 60 and one of his greatest regrets was that he peaked too soon, and that was a century ago
Changing age limits is just a bandage on a bigger wound, which is that US society struggles to produce quality leadership. But that's what dominating the world for a generation will do, it makes you soft.
If you're not a selfish person, and you get old, assuming you still have your mental health, you'll use the wisdom you accrued to benefit the world; if you are a selfish person, you lack wisdom, and you'll use the knowledge and tricks you acquired to leech the most from the world before you mercifully die.
>Changing age limits is just a bandage on a bigger wound, which is that US society struggles to produce quality leadership. But that's what dominating the world for a generation will do, it makes you soft.
I agree with this, but I'd replace soft with relentlessly selfish. Instead of realizing the need to work together to make something better, they're in it for personal gain.
Elderly people are not soft. Elderly senators caught the tail end of WW2 and the Cold War. Relentlessly selfish refers to young people who think believe mother nature itself entitles them to the newest iPhone, free housing, healthcare, and debt forgiveness with less financial awareness than the senators they're complaining about.
1. Never said old people are soft.
2. Never said old people are more selfish than young people.
3. I hope this is a simple misreading on your part, rather than a deliberate attempt to twist my words.
4. Your portrait of young people and their situation is just a Fox News hot take.
"I agree with this, but I'd replace soft with relentlessly selfish. Instead of realizing the need to work together to make something better, they're in it for personal gain."
Please do not use the phrases "simple misreading" or "deliberate attempt to twist words" to describe anyone else
My portrait is pretty objective - please get deported to some other countries so you can find out what living conditions are and what "in it for personal gain" turns into in the rest of the world. Our system is really not that bad, even taking into account the malevolent actors
which is that US society struggles to produce quality leadership
Is it a lack of quality leaders, or a lack of electing said leaders?
The more I look at the U.S. the more I think it has only a single political problem: the winner-takes-all voting system. With an ability to form coalition governments the two party system would die, and with it many of the decades-long incumbencies.