In recent years the human lifespan has experienced significant growth in all countries around the world. Accordingly, people are living up to their 80s in good health. Although it is definitely a beneficial advantage for humankind, it is also a destructive disadvantage for our planet. Moreover, the environment suffers from depletion of natural resources for the reason that inhabitants increasingly drain them. While there are diverging perspectives on this matter, it is imperative to examine merits and demerits of both positions with the support of real-life examples.
Advocates of the notion that growing life expectancy will lead to detrimental congestion argue that this issue warrants serious attention. Key concerns raised by eminent scientists include the looming threat of food insecurity and reduced access to safe water, forcing many people to endure severe living conditions. I’m totally convinced, that the longer we live, the more difficult it becomes for us to outlast. It is only a matter of time before a desperate battle for survival will begin.
Conversely, some contend that continuance of life is really a non-issue. In support of this standpoint, numerous individuals allege the studies that confirm that a longer lifetime will lead to an elongated working capacity of citizens on a global scale. Humans will be able to work longer, which means retiring later. At first glance, the scenario appears appealing.
In summation, the potential consequences of longevity are too significant to dismiss. Persons stricken in years are sure to be incapacitated, accordingly an increase in the retirement age would be negligible. What’s more important is that environmental degradation and natural resource depletion can only exacerbate poverty and hunger. This, in turn, will result in international armed conflicts and protracted crises.