How Old is Too Old?

 

One of the things about life past 40 is that you start to think about getting old. Its like this, when you’re 20, 40 is a long way away. However, one you reach 40, you realise that 60 isn’t that far off.

Modern science has made getting old quite common. Back in the dark ages, being an “Old Man” was something that got you venerated. Think of the Arab monarchs who call themselves “Sheikh,” which roughly translates as “Old Man.” Why were old people venerated thus? It was simple – it meant that you had the ability to survive. This was a venerated skill in an era where many didn’t survive past adolescence.

However, its different in today’s world. If you live in a country with a reasonable amount of peace and stability, its almost a given that you’re to see your 80^th birthday at the very least. Think about it, around two hundred years ago, anyone over 50 was considered an antique. Today, life effectively begins at 50, when the body is still functioning and you have developed enough experience to be confident about most things.

Modern science is has done a great job at preserving our functionality. As an example, I used to do the PR for Alcon, which sold “Intra-Ocular Lenses” (IOL), which had the ability to give a 60-year-old better vision than they had in their 20s. There are more examples of the miracle of modern science.

So, getting “Old” isn’t the deteriorating experience that it used to be. However, as the withdrawal of US President Joe Biden from the 2024 election shows, there’s such a thing known as “Too Old.” Throughout the campaign, Mr. Trump’s team hammered Mr. Biden for being “too old” and “too frail,” to run things. Now that Mr. Biden’s most likely successor in the 59-year-old Kamala Haris, the same is likely to be done to the 78-year-old Mr. Trump.

The two grandpas who were running for the most powerful office on the planet have been caught looking old and doddery. They’ve showed us that getting old doesn’t just mean physically weaker but there’s also a mental decline. Whatever is said of Singapore’s first Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, one has to credit him for acknowledging his facilities would eventually decline and stepping aside whilst he still had his marbles with him.

However, as my Neurotic Angel likes to point out, “What is the cut off point for Old?” If Biden and Trump are “old” at 81 and 78 respectively, what does that make Dr. Mohamad Mahathir, Malaysia’s never ending political leader who is 99 and showing no signs of frailty. Dr. Mahathir first became Prime Minister in 1981 at the age of 56. He remained there for 22 years and left office at 78. Instead of retiring quietly, he continued to be active and was back in his old job at the age of 93. So, whenever a politician around the world says they are old, there’s an inevitably a meme involving Dr. Mahathir.

 

 If there ever was a poster boy for active aging, it’s definitely Dr. Mahathir. Unlike his contemporaries, Lee Kuan Yew and Suharto, Dr. Mahathir remained active and has outlived both in style.

You have the example of the frail Mr. Biden at 81 and the sprightly Dr. Mahathir at 99 and it remains a challenge to come up with a cut off point for what defines “Too Old.” Age in many ways is a number but its arbitrary.

As someone who had to take up regular exercise in his late forties, I would say that there are two aspects of aging that we need to acknowledge.

The first is that aging involves a physical and mental decline. Generally speaking, once you reach a certain age, you get set in your ways and somehow more resistant to change. You fail to realise that the things that made you successful are now the things that are bringing you down.

The second point is the counter to the first, which is the fact that one can has depository of knowledge and experience, which can be utilized. Whenever I tell Kiddo that I’d love for her to support me instead of me supporting her by my 50^th, her inevitable reply is “Oi, people at 50 are still strong.”

So, how do you get the second from happening without the risk of the first? There are organisations, like General Electric (GE), what pair up the old and young in teams. The idea being that junior gets wisdom from senior but senior also stays active and gets new trends from junior.

There are also “mandatory” retirement ages for top people, which usually around 65. However, at an age where people still have their wits about them in their 70s and 80s, one might say this is a waste of talent.

In Singapore politics, the way of managing this has been for every Prime Minister to become a “Senior” Minister in their successor’s cabinet. A case of letting making sure the old man has no actual power to screw things up but still able to contribute the benefits of experience. There is, however, one major problem. Everyone assumes that the Prime Minister takes orders from the Senior Minister. Lee Kuan Yew, who was both Senior Minister and Minister Mentor would keep telling people he was no longer in charge and the more he said it, the less we believed him. Now that Lee Hsien Loong is “Senior Minister,” we all assume that he’s telling Lawrence Wong what to do.

So, how do you make things work? One would be to ensure that the “retained” old guy is not actually a member of the management committee or cabinet so that while the Old Guy remains useful, its clear that he or she is not an “Authority figure”

Then, there’s the possibility of working on the principle that behavior rather than age should be a trigger point for mandatory retirement. A case of keep the guy there until he or she start to show signs of obvious decline.

It’s a challenging issue. However, its an issue worth addressing, especially if you consider the fact that most advanced countries are rapidly aging. The obvious point being, if you don’t have a lot of talent, how do you make the most of what you have?