[ExI] Economics of SENS

Aleksei Riikonen aleksei at iki.fi
Tue Jun 17 10:39:53 UTC 2008

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:58 PM, The Avantguardian
<avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> A question entered my mind today: With rising medical costs and an ever
> increasing population of elderly forced to retire at age 65 just when they
> start needing the medical care the most, would the added productivity of SENS
> and the elimination of the medical costs associated with aging simply by
> preventing it not be more cost effective for individuals, insurance companies,
> and society as a whole in the long run? I don't have any numbers but I suspect
> that government/private investment in SENS could conceivably pay for itself in
> the span of several decades. I mean why let a productive tax-payer, consumer,
> or policy holder steadily become a burden on society by letting him get old
> when it is preventable? Any thoughts? This might be topic that Robin Hanson and
> Aubrey de Grey could address more effectively than I for obvious reasons.

One thing to remember is that even if people don't get old, many/most
will still want to retire once they have enough money in the bank.

Anyway, I wouldn't think too much about the economics of a situation
where the workforce consists of immortal humans. I doubt that will
happen sooner, or last for long before we have AIs that do all jobs
better than baseline-humans.

Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list