Letter to the editor: Productive seniors | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Productive seniors

Please, George Wandell, tell me that your letter “Let’s eliminate unproductives” (March 9, TribLIVE) was simply tongue-in-cheek and not a serious opinion. Surely you jest.

Do you not know others in their 60s, 70s, 80s and beyond who are still making meaningful contributions to their communities? I cannot imagine how libraries, hospitals, schools, churches, Meals On Wheels, food banks and other organizations would be able to accomplish their worthwhile efforts without volunteers . Many continue to work well beyond retirement age, some in whole new careers. At 75, I became a self-published writer of inspirational nonfiction books that have helped others.

If you target the elderly, what group would you go after next? The physically disabled? The mentally challenged? How about those who lose their jobs? How many weeks or perhaps days would they be given to find a new one? No doubt you also have the homeless and addicted firmly in your sights. Would you ferret out the young people who live in their parents’ basements and do nothing but play computer games?

How would you decide who stays and who goes? Where could you find people who would back up this theory? Sounds to me like previous events in history when people have been destroyed because of beliefs, ethnicity, etc. Is this what you want?

Last question: Since you have continued to enjoy life 30 years past what you deem as productive years, if this is such a disservice to mankind, why are you still here?

Patricia Slye

North Huntingdon

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.