[Mb-civic] Boomers at 60: burden or benefit? - Ellen Goodman - Boston Globe Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

  Boomers at 60: burden or benefit?

By Ellen Goodman  |  February 3, 2006  |  The Boston Globe

IN RETROSPECT, it was the perfect way to begin The Year the Baby Boomers 
Turned 60. After all, the audience for the Rolling Stones concert was 
divided roughly into two demographics: One generation (mine) was 
awestruck that anyone our age could rock 'n' roll for two straight hours 
without Advil or a stretcher. ''Jumpin' Jack Flash" to you, too. The 
younger generation couldn't believe they were even at a rock concert by 
a 62-year-old. ''Satisfaction" galore.

Now, in a tribute that's even more fitting to the times, the Stones are 
set to do the halftime gig for the Super Bowl. Hold on to your remote: 
The Stones, whose players' average age is 62.5, will entertain for the 
NFL, whose players' average age is 26.4.

This choice was not without its little malfunctions. At first, the 
misguided Super Bowl planners tried to exclude anyone older than 45 from 
the corps of 2,000 dancing, cheering extras who take to the field for 
the extravaganza. It was too physically taxing, a poor NFL spokesman 
told a Detroit newspaper, ''You have to attend rehearsal and be able to 
stand for long stretches of time." Hey, you, get off of my cloud.

It wasn't long before the idea of barring people because they were too 
old and decrepit to cheer their gyrating, cranking elders struck the 
irony bone. Thus, Super Bowl XL is now officially the site of the first 
successful protest movement of the aging baby boomers: for the right to 
rock 'n' roll.

Somewhere in here, there's a symbol waiting to get out. We are less than 
two months into the era of aging baby boomers, an oxymoron if there ever 
was one. About 7,918 people turn 60 every day. This is a generation that 
spawned an industry of trend watchers and boomerologists.

Now the boomerology is focused or bifocused on the meaning of age 
itself. What will the boomers do to/for/about age? Are they going to be 
on the playing field or the sidelines?

We seem to be developing two distinct story lines about the boomers at 
60. The generation is portrayed as either a crushing burden or a huge 
benefit.

On the one hand, we are told that the 78 million Americans coming of age 
are going to wreck Medicare, deep-six Social Security, and eat their 
children's future. Along the way, they're going to produce a booming 
industry for Depends, Nexium, and hip replacements.

On the other hand, we are told that boomers will be the most healthy, 
fit, long-living, and independent elders ever. They're going to produce 
a booming industry for yoga, Pilates, triathlons, and, OK, hip replacements.

On the job front, we're warned too that boomers aren't saving enough 
money and will have to scramble for menial jobs to supplement their 
income. But we're also warned that boomers will hang on to all the best 
jobs and tenure positions, clog the pipeline to the top, and keep 
Generation X waiting like Prince Charles.

The boomers are coming! Start building nursing homes? The boomers are 
coming! Retrofit the Oval Office? One scenario envisions senior 
discounts at the golf course; the other sees them running for president 
at 80.

Meanwhile, lifestyle stories of this birthday party describe 60 as the 
new 40. And then promptly prescribe Botox, Viagra, and extreme makeovers 
as party favors. The split-screen theme seems to be that it's great to 
be older as long as you look younger.

Thirty years ago, Gail Sheehy ended ''Passages" with 50-year-olds. Now, 
she's back writing about ''Sex and the Seasoned Woman" and promoting her 
book by posing in a black leather skirt and draped over a sofa. Is this 
what we mean by sexagenarian?

It's not surprising to find conflicting narratives following this 
generation from the 1960s into their 60s. In their youth, after all, 
boomers were characterized and caricatured as self-centered materialists 
or selfless agents of change. Now, they are alternately portrayed in 
surveys and screeds as greedy geezers who want to take it all and 
compassionate do-gooders who want to spend their late years changing the 
world.

The truth is that baby boomers have never had much more in common than a 
date book. The folks who turn 60 this year are as different as Bill 
Clinton and George Bush, Donald Trump and Cher. Even if boomers share a 
fascination with their aging process, aging itself may be as 
individualistic as a set of genes.

''You Can't Always Get What You Want." Those who were not Mick Jagger at 
26 aren't going to be Mick Jagger at 62. Nevertheless, it would be 
refreshing if this generation, well beyond its own halftime, got 
together at long last to protest something more meaningful than equal 
access to a rock concert.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/02/03/boomers_at_60_burden_or_benefit/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060203/57619898/attachment.htm