- Sale items. Buy now - stock going fast. Specials
- You must now select Courier Delivery if you wish to receive items before Christmas.
Forums > Social Discussion > Human death vs age graphs or tables wanted, and income distribution
Login/Join to Participatejourneyman
97 posts
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
97 posts
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posted:
Does anyone have or know a good place to look for a graph or table that shows the percentage of a given group of people born at the same time still alive at different lenghts of time after the bate of birth, preferably one that is divided up according to various healthy or unhealthy activities of the group measured.
This information seems very hard to find , with most things like this showing only the probability of dying at a given age for those still alive the previous year.
Information regarding severe disablement would also be welcome.
I have developed an interest in this topic after reading in Making Money Made Simple by Noel Whittaker , that for 100 people who live to 15 years, by age 65
38 are dead
38 are dead broke
16 are working
7 are retired on a livable income
1 is wealthy
Apon analyzing these figures it means that for 161 people alive at 15, if you are one of the 100 alive from this lot at 65, your odds are
61.3 are dead broke
25.8 are working
11.3 are retired on a livabe income
1.61 are wealthy
This also makes me question the wisdom of devoting ones life to retiring wealthy , as you are almost 40 times more likely to be dead than be rich at 65, although those who are dead broke might also wish they had saved a bit harder aswell.
Does anyone have or know a good place to look for a graph or table that shows the percentage of a given group of people born at the same time still alive at different lenghts of time after the bate of birth, preferably one that is divided up according to various healthy or unhealthy activities of the group measured.
This information seems very hard to find , with most things like this showing only the probability of dying at a given age for those still alive the previous year.
Information regarding severe disablement would also be welcome.
I have developed an interest in this topic after reading in Making Money Made Simple by Noel Whittaker , that for 100 people who live to 15 years, by age 65
38 are dead
38 are dead broke
16 are working
7 are retired on a livable income
1 is wealthy
Apon analyzing these figures it means that for 161 people alive at 15, if you are one of the 100 alive from this lot at 65, your odds are
61.3 are dead broke
25.8 are working
11.3 are retired on a livabe income
1.61 are wealthy
This also makes me question the wisdom of devoting ones life to retiring wealthy , as you are almost 40 times more likely to be dead than be rich at 65, although those who are dead broke might also wish they had saved a bit harder aswell.
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
I think the lesson you are supposed to learn is that you SHOULD work hard and use your money wisely. The statistics don't dictate reality. What you choose to do will determine the numbers for your generation. The previous generation may have ended up mostly dead and dead broke, but if we learn from the past we can end up perhaps living longer with more wealth.
Besides, even if you die your heirs would rather you have died rich. Plan as if you will live forever, but make a will to leave the money to your children and to good charities just in case you don't.
I think the lesson you are supposed to learn is that you SHOULD work hard and use your money wisely. The statistics don't dictate reality. What you choose to do will determine the numbers for your generation. The previous generation may have ended up mostly dead and dead broke, but if we learn from the past we can end up perhaps living longer with more wealth.
Besides, even if you die your heirs would rather you have died rich. Plan as if you will live forever, but make a will to leave the money to your children and to good charities just in case you don't.
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
As patriarch is saying, it's not suggesting that at age 65 someone spins a big wheel and either kills you or affects your bank account.
An initeresting note, I'll bet if you LOOKED at the folks when they were 15, you could have a REALLY good sense of where they were going to end up when they were 65.
Teachers in my school district that retire ALL retire on a livable income. Assuming nothing goes radically wrong in my life I assume I'd end up there also.
And most importantly, the amount of money you have when you die in no way dictates the quality of life you've had. I don't think me at 65 would ever say "You shouldn't have spent all that money traveling around the world and having amazing adventures and meeting wonderful people."
I'm very responsible with money. I've always been. It's alarming to see how many people aren't.
I don't make a ton, but I spend less than I make and I put the rest away in a retirement fund.
I think the key is being happy with what you've got while actively planning for the future.
As someone who works with relatively rich children, I can tell you that money and material possessions certainly don't buy happiness. But a certain level of financial security certainly does buy piece of mind.
Educate yourself so you can get a good stable job. Then spend less than you make.
Easy.
Oh, and be sure and be born in an affluent Westernized country too.
As patriarch is saying, it's not suggesting that at age 65 someone spins a big wheel and either kills you or affects your bank account.
An initeresting note, I'll bet if you LOOKED at the folks when they were 15, you could have a REALLY good sense of where they were going to end up when they were 65.
Teachers in my school district that retire ALL retire on a livable income. Assuming nothing goes radically wrong in my life I assume I'd end up there also.
And most importantly, the amount of money you have when you die in no way dictates the quality of life you've had. I don't think me at 65 would ever say "You shouldn't have spent all that money traveling around the world and having amazing adventures and meeting wonderful people."
I'm very responsible with money. I've always been. It's alarming to see how many people aren't.
I don't make a ton, but I spend less than I make and I put the rest away in a retirement fund.
I think the key is being happy with what you've got while actively planning for the future.
As someone who works with relatively rich children, I can tell you that money and material possessions certainly don't buy happiness. But a certain level of financial security certainly does buy piece of mind.
Educate yourself so you can get a good stable job. Then spend less than you make.
Easy.
Oh, and be sure and be born in an affluent Westernized country too.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Try the Insurance companies. Their acturies should have stats on life expentancy of various healthy or unhealthy activities of different groups in the community.
You can't take it wih you.
Try the Insurance companies. Their acturies should have stats on life expentancy of various healthy or unhealthy activities of different groups in the community.
You can't take it wih you.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
journeyman
97 posts
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
97 posts
Location: Brisbane, Queensland
Posted:
Hopefully the 38 % dead part is made up almost entirely of the smokers, drinkers, and overfatted slobs.
That gives me a good chance of being alive, and since I am such a frugal scrooge and save about a third of my money my savings might be worth a lot more when everyone else who didnt save has got squat.
That said, peak oil 's aproach and the current overly priced nature of investments combined with most peoples willingness to get into debt makes predicting the economy hard these days.
Sounds like the best option is to save up now and buy investments cheap when the baby boomers start dying off in droves in about 10-15 years time, not now when the price is jacked up by negative gearing and borrowed money.
Hopefully the 38 % dead part is made up almost entirely of the smokers, drinkers, and overfatted slobs.
That gives me a good chance of being alive, and since I am such a frugal scrooge and save about a third of my money my savings might be worth a lot more when everyone else who didnt save has got squat.
That said, peak oil 's aproach and the current overly priced nature of investments combined with most peoples willingness to get into debt makes predicting the economy hard these days.
Sounds like the best option is to save up now and buy investments cheap when the baby boomers start dying off in droves in about 10-15 years time, not now when the price is jacked up by negative gearing and borrowed money.
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [human death v * age graph * table * wanted income] we found the following existing topics.
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com