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

Why a traditional retirement may be pushed back 25 years

Let's ditch the idea of retirement

Rethinking super tax concessions for the future

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

How to minimise tax with a will

Inheritance tax implications in Australia may surprise some, as poor estate planning without proper wills or trusts can lead to costly tax bills and delays for beneficiaries.

Testamentary trusts post-budget: Estate planning, tax reform and the ‘death tax’ debate

Proposed Budget changes to taxation are casting new uncertainty over testamentary trusts, prompting closer scrutiny of estate planning structures and the real implications of reforms still taking shape.

Meg on SMSFs: The CGT changes don’t impact super but what about Div 296 tax decisions?

New CGT rules could tip the scales in the super vs non-super debate. For those facing the Division 296 tax, the case for withdrawing has gotten more complex. A "comparison rate" tool may help assess decisions.

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

The strange effect of the 30% minimum capital gains tax

The 30% minimum tax on capital gains sits at the heart of the budget's proposed reforms. Yet the mechanics reveal anomalies that introduce unexpected distortions that raise questions about its design.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 667 with weekend update

The downfall of the giant and three lessons for investors.

  • 18 June 2026

Latest Updates

Latest from Morningstar

Ranking three common retirement strategies

The defining challenge of retirement isn't just about building wealth, it's about converting your lifetime savings into sustainable income. A holistic understanding of different strategies can improve long-term outcomes.

Economy

Was life really better in the good old days?

Are we worse off than previous generations? Lately, there seems to be a heightened level of angst that economic conditions are getting harder and that the two-party political system (and maybe democracy too) is failing voters.

Retirement

Australia has saved $4.5 trillion for retirement. Here's what matters more

Most Australians approaching retirement can tell you the exact dollar value of their super account. But success depends on more than a sizeable balance. Here's four key questions to ask yourself at the start of the financial year. 

Who gains in an AI-supercharged economy?

AI is already reshaping the economy, but companies building transformative technologies rarely capture the greatest long-term value. Instead, those benefits accrue to the users. We may well see this pattern reproduced. 

Taxation

Div 296's million-dollar reset worth $25,000

The 'cost base reset' for the new super tax is being sold as protection for pre-July gains. A worked example shows $1M of protection is worth about $25,000, and the real deadline has not passed.

Latest from Morningstar

The forecasting fix that Wall Street missed

Asking whether markets are overpriced may be the wrong question. New research suggests that traditional valuation metrics used to forecast returns may have been misread. Here are five takeaways for investors.

Investment strategies

Should a fund manager invest their own money differently?

Investors often like the idea that fund managers should invest client money exactly as they invest their own. But reality is more complicated. Unique circumstances make a different approach rational and, at times, beneficial.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 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.