When Will You Die?

Are world governments really doing enough to cope with the explosion of old people? By that I mean the median age in most countries is set to rise markedly, I'm not advocating a combustion-based solution to the issue.
According to a Facebook application, I will die on the June 30, 2012, in a car accident in Fort Peck, Montana. From what I've read online about Fort Peck online (population 240), if I end up living there, I'll probably step out in front of the vehicle by choice.

If I stay away from Fort Peck there's every chance I'll survive to 2044, but with a young family I'm hoping to make it beyond that. The Life Tables data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (released last week) provide a simple way of viewing life expectancy based on age. Have a look at the table below to see when you are going to die (based on averages only, you still need to watch your diet and exercise). If you want a second (less scientific) opinion and you're on Facebook, try When Will You Die? Be warned, you'll probably spam all your friends in the process and they'll all end up wanting to kill you.

Back to the legitimate statistics, where life expectancy at birth has been steadily rising. A newborn boy will live six years longer than 20 years ago. For girls the increase is four years, but they'll still live four years longer than the boys. That differential continues, of course, up to old age. Women could argue that it is nature's way of telling them to marry a younger man --- so they die around the same age --- but, of course, older men are much more charismatic, have those attractive weathered features and have so much more to talk about. [Of course, then there are the "Dad jokes" to put up with. -Ed.]

Living longer is probably a good thing, so long as you can do basic bodily functions by yourself. It does, of course, provide opportunities and challenges for the economy. Just how we support the demands for pensions and health is a big question for most of the Western world, particularly when governments are universally trying to cut back on spending.

To show the extent of the issue I graphed the median age of various countries from the United Nations World Population Database. You can see how in the space of 100 years Australia's median age will have shifted from 30 to 43. The proportion of the population aged 65 and over will have risen from 8 percent in the "never had it so good" '50s, through to 24 percent by 2050. That's great news for cranky talkback radio operators, but somewhat limits our selection for a decent cricket team (the impact has already been felt).

Whatever the pressures Australia faces from an ageing population, ours is insignificant compared to Japan, which is grappling with a median age rising from 22 to 55 in the space of a century. By 2050, a massive 38 percent of the population will be aged 65 or older. China, one of the world's fastest growing economies, will see the median age increase from 34 today to 45 in the next forty years. Eight percent of the population is 65 or over today, but it'll be up to 23 percent in forty years' time.

All of this would be great news if these people were retiring wealthy. The truth is in many parts of the world, Australia included, savings do not match life expectancy. We'll be forced to work longer to maintain our life standards. And the massive shift in median age shows there needs to be a marked change in government policy --- but have our elected representatives really caught onto this yet?