This is the brother of the Mayor of Chicago. One flaw in his argument is his obsession with novelty. Must any and all contributions be new? Some of the best work is done improving, or maintaining what is and what is known. This adult appears to have an infantile opinion on the purpose of life. Nazis used to refer to "useless eaters." Then there was the eugenics movement. Why must everyone make novel contributions to humanity? Are people who just live, less valuable? He also indicates an elitism which is shared by the current leaders of government and corporations.
[From article]
It is true, people can continue to be productive past 75—to write and
publish, to draw, carve, and sculpt, to compose. But there is no getting
around the data. By definition, few of us can be exceptions. Moreover,
we need to ask how much of what “Old Thinkers,” as Harvey C. Lehman
called them in his 1953 Age and Achievement, produce is novel
rather than reiterative and repetitive of previous ideas. The
age-creativity curve—especially the decline—endures across cultures and
throughout history, suggesting some deep underlying biological
determinism probably related to brain plasticity
http://www.theatlantic.com/
features/archive/2014/09/why-
i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/
Why I Hope to Die at 75
An argument that society and families—and you—will be better off if nature takes its course swiftly and promptly
Ezekiel J. Emanuel
Photos by Jake Chessum
SEPTEMBER 17, 2014
* * *
http://www.nationalreview.com/
article/388787/should-we-hope-
die-75-victor-davis-hanson
SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 4:58 PM
Should We Hope to Die at 75?
Contra Ezekiel Emanuel, age is no absolute barometer for human vitality and dignity.
By Victor Davis Hanson