Ageism is in the Spotlight: What it means for Retirement Planning
A recent essay in the New York Times by Yale professor Samuel Moyn argues that older Americans are hoarding the country's potential: accumulating too much wealth, occupying too many jobs, and are holding disproportionate political power and representation. While some of his proposed solutions appear to be genuinely about supporting younger generations, others specifically target older adults in ways that reflect ageism. He proposes reintroducing mandatory retirement ages and a "progressive tax on older homeowners to incentivize them to downsize."
As you might guess, it has sparked a debate. The Stanford Center on Longevity and those of us working in the field of retirement and aging have responded by pointing to various statistics, additional considerations, and nuances. The underlying issue is about ageism.
For every wealthy Boomer kicking it up in Margaritaville, there are far too many who lack basic retirement savings or are limited by chronic health problems or loneliness. —Karen Breslau, Stanford Center on Longevity
The reality? Approximately 15% of older Americans live in poverty or barely above it. Many are on fixed incomes, terrified of outliving their savings. The Transamerica Institute's research shows that retirement security in America is, to put it politely, stuck in the doldrums. — Janine Vanderburg, Slaying the Ageism Dragon
I also have an issue with the piece more broadly: using the word “gerontocracy.” It’s sensationalist, fanning the flames of ageist ideas which will not solve the real problems Moyn outlines. —Bob Kramer, Founder at Nexus Insights
Moyn acknowledges issues with ageism in his essay, but then some of his proposals appear to dismiss the needs and contributions of older adults. Aging advocates are pushing for communities that value and support people as they age. Policies such as mandatory retirement are considered ageist, as they clearly and specifically target older adults as a category, regardless of individual circumstance, skills and ability, or ambition to contribute.
From Implicit to Explicit Ageism
What came to mind for me, when reading about this debate, is the idea that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Moyn is coming out with a book, Gerontocracy in America, and even the backlash to the essay will surely drive sales. He makes important points that are worthy of consideration, particularly for younger generations, even if there are real problems with the proposed solutions. Dismissing his work entirely will not help us advance theory, policy, or advocacy.
But it is not only Moyn's essay and book that may be getting attention. It is the issue of ageism itself.
This debate brings ageism to the forefront and makes it explicit. And perhaps that is not such a bad thing.
Advocates against ageism have long been attempting to draw attention to something quietly woven through our daily lives. It happens subtly, indirectly, and often beneath awareness. How do you challenge something that sits below the surface of public consciousness?
Ageism refers to the stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination directed towards others or oneself based on age. It affects people of all ages.
— World Health Organization, Global Report on Ageism (2021).
Some progress has been made with regard to ageism. Notably, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) made it illegal to force employees to retire once they reach a certain age. Yet ageism has continued to permeate society at an individual and institutional level, often beneath the surface of public awareness.
Why this Matters for Retirement
Reverting to mandatory retirement would put financial strain on older adults and hinder their ability to contribute meaningfully. It would also remove agency in the retirement transition and thereby put retirees at greater risk of difficult adjustment and reduced wellbeing. One of the most consistent predictors of difficult adjustment to retirement is involuntary retirement.
The reason involuntary retirement is problematic is pretty clear. Work is much more than a paycheck. For many of us, it is a source of reward, feelings of achievement and recognition, belonging, and even a sense of identity. Also, it is more difficult to accept a significant life change when the choice was not yours.
Personal Consequences for Age Beliefs
Retirement is often associated with negative aspects of old age. But also, these negative beliefs about aging amount to stereotyping our future selves, and they have measurable consequences. As the definition above clarifies, ageism can include stereotypes about oneself. Most of us have heard older adults speaking negatively about old age, and oftentimes to younger people and even children.
Ageist beliefs begin at a very young age and are so embedded in many Western cultures that most people are barely aware they exist. Research published in the British Journal of Developmental Psychology found that ageist attitudes are already evident in children as young as four to eight years old. These attitudes are absorbed from cultural messages long before children can critically evaluate them.
What is perhaps most striking is the effect that negative views of aging have on health and longevity. Becca Levy, PhD, of Yale School of Public Health, has shown through longitudinal research that people with positive views of aging live an average of 7.5 years longer than those with negative views. The ageism we absorb from culture shapes our own health, our longevity, and our own experience of growing older.
Ageism is Not Only About Older Adults
It is also worth noting that ageism does not operate in one direction. Beliefs and biases about age affect interactions and decisions for people at any stage of life. Younger generations also navigate assumptions and hurdles rooted in their age.
In fact, at least one response to Moyn's essay challenged his credibility by referencing his own age. If we are genuinely committed to combating ageism, this is worth reflecting on. Debating issues and constructively challenging others’ ideas can help us develop our thinking and even policies. But, particularly when we are talking about ageism, let’s not discredit someone’s work because they have not reached a certain age.
There are real cognitive and physical changes associated with aging–however young or old. Young children do not have the same cognitive abilities as young adults, and there are cognitive changes throughout adulthood. But cognitive decline varies between people of the same age, and categorical policies such as mandatory retirement for everyone at a certain age, do not account for this variability. This is precisely why the ADEA was introduced: Because age alone is an unreliable predictor of job performance. Some adults over 65 may be able to perform just as well in their role, if not better, than others in their 40’s.
The argument against ageism that people should not be judged, dismissed, or defined by a number on paper applies in every direction.
What This Means for the Work You Do
The debate Moyn has ignited is a reminder that ageism can come up in policy, as well as daily lived experiences that shapes how people see themselves as they approach and enter retirement. It has an impact on personal outcomes.
The clients you work with have absorbed cultural messages about aging throughout their lives. These messages can limit their sense of what is possible, what they deserve, and who they are allowed to become in this next chapter. Change does not happen overnight. It takes small shifts, repeated over time.
Every conversation that helps someone approach the retirement transition with clarity, agency, and a genuine sense of possibility is a small act of resistance against a narrative that too often treats retirement, and aging, as decline. We can work across generations to foster more positive views of aging, for ourselves as well as for others.
To stop ageism, let’s get back to understanding the person inside, not how old they look or sound, or numbers on paper. Let’s look at context and character, however young or old.
