A theoretical problem can exist, though a practical solution seems clear to me, even if it is seen by many as being harsh:Why would we want to extend life beyond a certain point of time?The World population may very well be 8,031,800,337 and is likely to go up even with those who die of general illness, the Pandemic, crime and climactic horrors.   The inhabitable land may decrease with the advance of oceans and the arable land may not be able to see the same increases in productivity with problems of nutrient depletion, the compromise of the nature of fertilizer in its double-edged problems as well as many other factors. [Fertilizer can make soil more productive, but can lead to algae blooms and oxygen loss and damage sea life which is an alternate source of nutrition.]To increase the life span is to further increase the population and the competition for housing, food and land and to worsen inequities of these and of medical care.Does it make any sense to see life lived to 120 or 130 years of age when many of modest incomes or the poor see retirement as problematic and often live with difficulty unless seeking charity help and perhaps aid of a food bank?I, for one, do not see the benefit to artificially extending life so that an Elon Musk or a Bill Gates can enjoy extra decades at ease while most may need to work into their 80s to cover the costs and find the extra years difficult to manage.

A theoretical problem can exist, though a practical solution seems clear to me, even if it is seen by many as being harsh:Why would we want to extend life beyond a certain point of time?The World population may very well be 8,031,800,337 and is likely to go up even with those who die of general illness, the Pandemic, crime and climactic horrors.   The inhabitable land may decrease with the advance of oceans and the arable land may not be able to see the same increases in productivity with problems of nutrient depletion, the compromise of the nature of fertilizer in its double-edged problems as well as many other factors. [Fertilizer can make soil more productive, but can lead to algae blooms and oxygen loss and damage sea life which is an alternate source of nutrition.]To increase the life span is to further increase the population and the competition for housing, food and land and to worsen inequities of these and of medical care.Does it make any sense to see life lived to 120 or 130 years of age when many of modest incomes or the poor see retirement as problematic and often live with difficulty unless seeking charity help and perhaps aid of a food bank?I, for one, do not see the benefit to artificially extending life so that an Elon Musk or a Bill Gates can enjoy extra decades at ease while most may need to work into their 80s to cover the costs and find the extra years difficult to manage.

user
yes
assistant