Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Vox)   We have a political problem no one wants to talk about: very old politicians   ( vox.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Supreme Court of the United States, mild cognitive impairment, Supreme Court, supreme court justice, President Trump, Democratic Party, time senatorial health, Justices Stephen Breyer  
•       •       •

2003 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Aug 2017 at 9:50 AM (10 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



151 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-08-08 08:20:08 AM  
AGEISM!!!

www.azquotes.com

 
2017-08-08 08:34:56 AM  
Soviet Union had a similar problem in the 80s

Its a warning sign of the fall of the Empire
 
2017-08-08 08:56:28 AM  
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this essentially a self-correcting problem?
 
2017-08-08 08:59:56 AM  

dittybopper: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this essentially a self-correcting problem?


Eventually is a long time to wait for a problem to correct.
 
2017-08-08 09:05:58 AM  
We have a Fark problem no one wants to talk about, too: Submitters using the exact same headline from the TFA in their submissions, with no attempt whatsoever to apply any creative or humorous twist to it.
 
2017-08-08 09:10:52 AM  

Pocket Ninja: We have a Fark problem no one wants to talk about, too: Submitters using the exact same headline from the TFA in their submissions, with no attempt whatsoever to apply any creative or humorous twist to it.


And admins greenlighting the headlines while ignoring those who are at least somewhat funny
 
2017-08-08 09:18:32 AM  
Easy problem to solve. We take away their current insurance, replace it with Obamacare, death panel the farkers when they're past their expiration date.
 
2017-08-08 09:24:58 AM  
Hell, I'm old, and most of the jokers running things are older than me

/Yeah, it's time the young'uns started taking over
//Those old bastards just refuse to die off, though
 
2017-08-08 09:30:49 AM  

kbronsito: Easy problem to solve. We take away their current insurance, replace it with Obamacare, death panel the farkers when they're past their expiration date.


The problem is Obamacare is working.  Maybe VA Healthcare or Indian stuff. Wait, I've got it: give them underfunded red state medicaid.
 
2017-08-08 09:34:45 AM  
Name a single person under the age of 35 who is qualified to be President of the United States.  Go ahead.  I'll wait.
 
2017-08-08 09:38:04 AM  

kbronsito: Easy problem to solve. We take away their current insurance, replace it with Obamacare, death panel the farkers when they're past their expiration date.


We already did that.
 
2017-08-08 09:43:26 AM  
Replace the current rule of filibustering with arena combat with another legislator, and make the event live pay-per-view.
 
2017-08-08 09:47:28 AM  

Mike_LowELL: Name a single person under the age of 35 who is qualified to be President of the United States.  Go ahead.  I'll wait.


That's easy

specials-images.forbesimg.com

He'll be eligible to run in a few years
 
2017-08-08 09:52:08 AM  

dittybopper: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this essentially a self-correcting problem?


No, because you have a wealth of institutional knowledge that's going into the grave. The GOP has managed to bring in a diseased pack of gibbering baboons behind their old folks and only now do you see younger liberals scared enough to value government.

So, no, you're wrong.
 
2017-08-08 09:54:57 AM  
The geriatricracy is by design. They're all afraid to leave because then they don't have the power to keep covering up their crimes.

img.fark.net
 
2017-08-08 09:55:18 AM  

Mike_LowELL: Name a single person under the age of 35 who is qualified to be President of the United States.  Go ahead.  I'll wait.


Weak trolling, dude. Go get a coffee and bring back your A-game.
 
2017-08-08 09:57:00 AM  
Prohibit cosmetic surgery and hair coloring for all elected officials.
 
2017-08-08 09:57:25 AM  
Hey now - it takes decades upon decades to become rich and corrupt enough to run for national office.
 
2017-08-08 09:58:00 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Hell, I'm old, and most of the jokers running things are older than me

/Yeah, it's time the young'uns started taking over
//Those old bastards just refuse to die off, though


We need the old ones in advisory and leadership roles while building up the next generation in the state houses.
 
2017-08-08 09:58:07 AM  

dittybopper: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this essentially a self-correcting problem?


Are you offering to fix the problem? .... from the rooftops, perhaps?
 
2017-08-08 10:00:20 AM  
No, its a problem we can't DO anything about without an amendment that has to go through those same old politicians.
 
2017-08-08 10:00:37 AM  
Term limits would be a place to start.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2017-08-08 10:00:56 AM  
The problem *isn't* health.  The problem is that they are making decisions that they aren't going to feel the consequences of.  There is nothing at stake.

I've mentioned this story before, but it bears repeating.  When Tom Baker (the 4th Doctor Who) was asked about how he voted on Brexit, he said he didn't vote and he didn't vote because be believed the people who made that decision should be the ones who would have to live with it.  It's about the best bit of political wisdom I've heard in a very long time.
 
2017-08-08 10:01:06 AM  
There are more old people in American than ever before. Old people vote. Ergo...old people hold office.

It also costs a shiat-ton to even get elected state representative. That prices out the young people from the get-go. Even city council is hard to pull off unless you're moneyed in some manner. There's a state senator in my state who lives off his salary but he's super-frugal. The younger people I've seen elected all have a similar story: they have money from some source (often family, sometimes they are fast burners in their outside jobs).
 
2017-08-08 10:01:42 AM  
I'd be willing to bet that if you compared the life expectancy back to 1776, you'd find that old white guys have made up the majority of legislatures throughout our history.
 
2017-08-08 10:02:41 AM  

thehobbes: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Hell, I'm old, and most of the jokers running things are older than me

/Yeah, it's time the young'uns started taking over
//Those old bastards just refuse to die off, though

We need the old ones in advisory and leadership roles while building up the next generation in the state houses.


No argument there. Us geezers have experience to offer even when it's a bad example

/but younger people need to take the reins
//We can take the occasional nap
 
2017-08-08 10:04:58 AM  
On a personal level, a number of folks have said to me "hey, you really should run for Congress, you're educated and competent, etc." My problem is that I really have no desire to see my life opened up for pundits and sleazy operators to dissect as needed. For that matter, would any of us desire that sort of scrutiny, at least those who have a soul and make an effort to be decent human beings? Just not worth it to me to attempt a run for political office and deal with untold levels of BS. I'd rather stay where I am and help folks on a daily basis than enter the poo flinging House or Senate chambers.
 
2017-08-08 10:05:52 AM  

dittybopper: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this essentially a self-correcting problem?


By that standard, all problems are.
Information that applies to all things isn't useful information.
 
2017-08-08 10:06:25 AM  

dwrash: Term limits would be a place to start.


The problem is corruption, not term limits.  Ban private financing of campaigns and fund them all publicly and you'd be surprised how responsive government becomes to the actual concerns of the nation.
 
2017-08-08 10:07:11 AM  

dwrash: Term limits would be a place to start.


Term limits result in inexperienced legislators being controlled by lobbyist and handlers who know how to manipulate them. Then you have legislators with even less accountability to their constituents.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2017-08-08 10:07:22 AM  

historynow11: On a personal level, a number of folks have said to me "hey, you really should run for Congress, you're educated and competent, etc." My problem is that I really have no desire to see my life opened up for pundits and sleazy operators to dissect as needed. For that matter, would any of us desire that sort of scrutiny, at least those who have a soul and make an effort to be decent human beings? Just not worth it to me to attempt a run for political office and deal with untold levels of BS. I'd rather stay where I am and help folks on a daily basis than enter the poo flinging House or Senate chambers.


And I think that is exactly one of the factors limiting the quality of people going to national office.  The second big one is that you basically have to have a corporate sponsor to get into office, and that puts a tight constraint on the type of values of people who eventually get a seat.  You don't see anyone from any party questioning the corporate party line on almost any issue.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2017-08-08 10:09:15 AM  

thehobbes: dwrash: Term limits would be a place to start.

Term limits result in inexperienced legislators being controlled by lobbyist and handlers who know how to manipulate them. Then you have legislators with even less accountability to their constituents.


Well.. you could ALMOST say there should be constraints on lobbying.  Hmmmmmm...
 
2017-08-08 10:09:23 AM  
No one wants to talk about it?

Seems like it's brought up on Fark every day.
 
2017-08-08 10:10:11 AM  
There's a simple solution: age limits. You can't run for office after the age of 70. Problem solved.

Not sure about judges. Part of the reason for lifetime appointments is to prevent corruption. But 25 year terms seems like a nice middle ground (18 as pointed out in the article seems too short).
 
2017-08-08 10:10:17 AM  

d23: The problem *isn't* health.  The problem is that they are making decisions that they aren't going to feel the consequences of.  There is nothing at stake.

I've mentioned this story before, but it bears repeating.  When Tom Baker (the 4th Doctor Who) was asked about how he voted on Brexit, he said he didn't vote and he didn't vote because be believed the people who made that decision should be the ones who would have to live with it.  It's about the best bit of political wisdom I've heard in a very long time.


That's silly. What's the cut off age for people who won't be impacted by Brexit? Do we now need the CBO to score every bill to determine when the impacts of said bill will then kick in, and then exclude anyone whom won't be impacted by it from voting on it?

There's a local election where I live today. I'm moving on September 3rd. Should I refrain from voting because I won't live in the same city next month?
 
2017-08-08 10:10:29 AM  

shastacola: I'd be willing to bet that if you compared the life expectancy back to 1776, you'd find that old white guys have made up the majority of legislatures throughout our history.


A loooooot of the Founding Fathers were in their 20s and 30s. Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration, Hamilton was 30 when he was working on the Federalist Papers.
 
2017-08-08 10:11:52 AM  
DNRTFA, but it seems to me it's the young politicians who just DGAF who are the problem. I'm looking at you, Ryan, Cotton, Paul, and the rest of your sh*t brigade.
 
2017-08-08 10:12:49 AM  
Surgeons see their malpractice insurance rates increase significantly after 70 because we've got data that shows that you are more expensive to insure after that age. You can keep operating, and if you're still good and still busy, the premium hike isn't terribly noticeable.

Older drivers are tested at the DMV more frequently because they are more likely to have lost the skills and abilities needed to drive safely. This isn't ageist, it's factual.

So we make attempts to get older surgeons out of the OR and older drivers off of the road (and I'm sure countless other examples), but we leave elderly people in charge of the country.
 
2017-08-08 10:12:58 AM  

Jonnadiah: shastacola: I'd be willing to bet that if you compared the life expectancy back to 1776, you'd find that old white guys have made up the majority of legislatures throughout our history.

A loooooot of the Founding Fathers were in their 20s and 30s. Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration, Hamilton was 30 when he was working on the Federalist Papers.


Average life expectancy in 1776 was 35 years old.

Those were old white guys.
 
2017-08-08 10:13:00 AM  

historynow11: On a personal level, a number of folks have said to me "hey, you really should run for Congress, you're educated and competent, etc." My problem is that I really have no desire to see my life opened up for pundits and sleazy operators to dissect as needed. For that matter, would any of us desire that sort of scrutiny, at least those who have a soul and make an effort to be decent human beings? Just not worth it to me to attempt a run for political office and deal with untold levels of BS. I'd rather stay where I am and help folks on a daily basis than enter the poo flinging House or Senate chambers.


I'm a professor, which means 4 months of vacation and I learn for a living. Much better than calling rich farks, and dumbing down my language for cable news.
 
2017-08-08 10:13:21 AM  

Pocket Ninja: We have a Fark problem no one wants to talk about, too: Submitters using the exact same headline from the TFA in their submissions, with no attempt whatsoever to apply any creative or humorous twist to it.


I was SO proud of this headline for a story about anti-fas and Trump Nazis.

img.fark.net

http://www.fark.com/comments/9688738/Lieutenant-Dan-you-got-magic-ora​n​ge-juice/new#new
 
2017-08-08 10:13:59 AM  
The world has always been run by cranky old people.  Old news is old news.
 
2017-08-08 10:14:22 AM  

dittybopper: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this essentially a self-correcting problem?


As medicine and technology advance, old people are kept around longer, and this "artificial" skewing is literally what has destroyed this country.
 
2017-08-08 10:14:27 AM  
It's widely recognized that the advanced age of the Russian leadership played a significant factor in the Soviet problems through the middle and late last century.  Khrushchev became erratic as a leader as he aged, not what you want during a nuclear standoff and leading to definite fears that he would either over-react or under-react in the event of a crisis. He was followed by Brezhnev, who eventually got so old that decisions were being made in his name by other party officials while he was ill. He was supposed to be replaced by a 79 year old who died, and was actually replaced by the 70 year old Andropov.

Relief finally came to the long suffering Russian people with the promotion of Gorbachev- a veritable spring chicken at the tender age of 54. Obviously he had a lot going on other than just his age, but his age was a big part of it. The first "young" man in his position in decades.
 
2017-08-08 10:16:04 AM  

Jonnadiah: shastacola: I'd be willing to bet that if you compared the life expectancy back to 1776, you'd find that old white guys have made up the majority of legislatures throughout our history.

A loooooot of the Founding Fathers were in their 20s and 30s. Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration, Hamilton was 30 when he was working on the Federalist Papers.


Just like their country, they were young, scrappy and hungry.

These days, not so much.
 
2017-08-08 10:17:43 AM  

Mike_LowELL: Name a single person under the age of 35 who is qualified to be President of the United States.  Go ahead.  I'll wait.


Well, technically nobody, since the age limit is pretty much one of two only qualifications for the job.
 
2017-08-08 10:19:22 AM  

Snapper Carr: Jonnadiah: shastacola: I'd be willing to bet that if you compared the life expectancy back to 1776, you'd find that old white guys have made up the majority of legislatures throughout our history.

A loooooot of the Founding Fathers were in their 20s and 30s. Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration, Hamilton was 30 when he was working on the Federalist Papers.

Average life expectancy in 1776 was 35 years old.

Those were old white guys.


Average life expectancy at birth was 35, because child mortality was much higher back then. If a person of English lineage survived to 21 in the 1700s, they'd be expected to live another 43.13 years. Citation here.
 
2017-08-08 10:19:45 AM  
A self-correcting issue, at worst
 
2017-08-08 10:20:41 AM  

feltrider: There's a simple solution: age limits. You can't run for office after the age of 70. Problem solved.

Not sure about judges. Part of the reason for lifetime appointments is to prevent corruption. But 25 year terms seems like a nice middle ground (18 as pointed out in the article seems too short).


I think 18 is the proposed amount because it mathematically ensures that every president gets at least one seat to fill ( or something like that ). You could probably go up to 25 if you want to add extra seats.
 
2017-08-08 10:20:42 AM  
Nobody wants to talk about it? It seems like it comes up a lot. It was a major issue of the 2016 presidential election.
 
Displayed 50 of 151 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report