Old in the Way and Hard at Work

As an example, he states that in Japanese society they will be paying 3% "of the gross domestic product by 2050" for pensions and health for their older citizens (Porter, 2004, par. 7).
Another area that is upsetting to Porter is the fact that older workers are living longer so the workplace will need to make a space for them longer. This will also mean that they will have to add more money to pension funds to keep those workers who retire.
6. Since most people are living until they are 80 or 90 years old governments will have to prepare for this by keeping people in the workforce for a longer time and they will need to pay pensions longer than they did in the past.
7. This causes an economic strain on the countries in two ways. First because they do not have a way to pay these payments and secondly because they do not have replacements for the older workers because of low population growth.
In my opinion, this is one of the most ridiculous articles that have ever been written in "The New York Times". Most countries have talked about how wonderful it is that people are able to work longer but currently they are the first ones who are let go in many situations. Because the United States is having an economic breakdown it seems easier for some companies to let older workers go in favor of younger people who will work for less. When you look at the article it seems that Porter is upset because people are living longer.
It seems strange that people would want a population to grow quickly and that they would give incentives to make this happen. As an example, the fact that European companies are giving incentives for women who will have more babies. Porter points out that mayor of Laviano has created a "$10,000 Euros (about $12,000 today)" for women who will have more children seem difficult to believe. What woman would not become a baby factory for that kind of money? (Porter, par. 18).
There was a time when the aging Baby Boomers were looked at