Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 66

Making judgments based on age

Complexity is one of the challenges of our information society, and we typically respond by making simplifying assumptions. This helps us manage the complexity but increases the risk of focusing on the wrong things. Worse, our prejudices easily lead us to simple answers which are consistent with our views but are often biased and misleading.

The complexity of longevity

Increasing longevity is one of the most challenging and complex issues we face – as a community and as individuals. It’s easy to fall into the trap of making sweeping statements. Prejudice, often fuelled by personal fear of our own mortality or that of our parents, can lead to big errors of judgment.

Why, for example, is there a disproportionate number of professional ice hockey players in Canada born in the first months of the calendar year? Readers of Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers know that the selection of young players for higher-level ice hockey coaching starts in year seven or eight. Children born early in a calendar year are more mature than their age peers born late in the same year. So they tend to be chosen for further coaching. Same ‘age’ but different capabilities.

We become increasingly individual and different as we mature. Our community largely avoids using age as a basis for judgment until around age 60 when quite suddenly ‘age’ again becomes an issue. It’s used as a decision point if we want to ‘retire’ or access our super or get a free transport pass. In its report ‘Access All Ages – Older Workers and Commonwealth Laws’ (March 2013) the Australian Law Reform Commission identified a plethora of areas in which age has become more obviously a basis for discrimination than it might have been at the time the original legislation appeared.

‘The end of the Age of Entitlement’ has now entered our vocabulary as a justification for a series of age-based changes to government support (along with many other changes).

Has the notion of a numerical age outlived its usefulness? We are already evolving more sophisticated ways of evaluating ourselves. Could we be heading for a new ‘Age of Enlightenment’ where we create more contemporary models to help us know and manage ourselves better with increasing longevity? If so, this should lead to more effective allocation of expensive resources. Benefits would accrue to both individuals and governments.

Personal capital or value

At My Longevity, we developed a simple model which a person can use to help with their ‘retirement’ decisions. It shows how our personal value (capital) can be seen as a simple combination of our capability and experience. These accrue and eventually decline at different rates over our working life. The model invites people to consider the impact of retiring on their personal value. Each of us is different so the individual model varies accordingly. It can help shift the retirement focus to one of personal value rather than just financial value, and introduces the notion of a personal time frame to underpin decisions. It also fosters the important notion of mastery over personal circumstances which in turn supports the quest for independence.


Source: My Longevity Pty Ltd

This illustration shows how personal capital can accrue over time with a potential bonus from deferral of retirement. Personal circumstances can vary a lot from this model. Although our capability might decline in later years, it can be compensated for by our experience.

There are many other ways of showing people the diversity of options that can open up with greater longevity awareness.

Older people are increasingly seeking information and services which help them manage their lives better. Many of them want to continue to contribute to society and do so.

When governments discriminate in delivering services using outdated metrics like age, they risk giving the message that they are behind the times and out of touch with reality. They attract criticism and waste opportunities to encourage informed independence.

Success in managing longevity requires an effective partnership between individuals and governments. Maximising personal capability requires an environment that is supportive and nurturing.

As Malcolm Gladwell suggests: “It’s true in sports and it’s true in the rest of our lives as well. We need to wake up to the fact that as a society we haven’t been doing our part.”

 

David Williams began longevity research in 1986 and was a Director with RetireInvest and CEO of Bridges. He chaired the Standards Australia Committee on Personal Financial Planning. David founded My Longevity Pty Limited in 2008.

 

  •   13 June 2014
  • 2
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Retiring from work is easy, retiring into life is harder

Why a traditional retirement may be pushed back 25 years

Let's ditch the idea of retirement

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Latest Updates

Exchange traded products

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Taxation

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Retirement

Three considerations before reshaping your legacy plan

Many retirees hope to leave a legacy. Proposed trust tax reforms could force families to rethink. The question is not how much to leave behind, but whether today's inheritance plans will still make sense as circumstances change.

Investment strategies

Why experienced investors still get markets wrong

Retirement is approaching. Markets are noisy. And every headline seems to demand action. The biggest investment risk isn't fear, greed or market volatility, it often arrives disguised as research and sensible risk management.

Shares

Why pay more for less?

Conditions were stacked in favour of professional investors in 2026. Most still fell short, raising questions about where investors should look for value. Meanwhile, an alternative strategy continued to make its case.

Investment strategies

Bleeding air out of the bubble

Equity valuations have fallen sharply over the past year, yet investors have largely been spared the volatility and losses that typically accompany a de-rating. What explains this unusually orderly reset? Here are five key drivers.

Strategy

Has AI gone rogue?

We worry about AI becoming conscious. But what if consciousness isn't the issue? The more unsettling possibility is a machine capable of pursuing objectives relentlessly, without motives, emotions, or awareness of any kind.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.