The aging population is going to become a major concern particularly in more developed countries, but this should not be viewed as something threatening to society. It is a blessing for any individual to live a long and healthy life, only that it could indicate that the responsibilities of caring for the elderly in the future may partly fall on the younger generation. The questions refer especially to how the younger generation could provide answers that are able to move society forward, taking into account a number of social and economic effects on the nation as a whole.

　　As the proportion of older people is steadily increasing, there are doubts over changes regarding the structure of a modern society. A possible change may the distribution of years of expected lifespan on the social scale, now that the family planning program is in fashion. Then, what will this dramatic shift mean for social services, such as health caring and pension on retirement? Overall effects, however, are not clear enough; for instance, how older people's prolonged lives are to be arranged in the social context? At this point, it is interesting to know how today's younger generation would re-think their roles in society if they might live 100 or more and be in good shape? And should working people in society continue to be retired as usual at 60 (for women) and 65 (for men)?

　　Economy-wise, questions also abound. To begin with, what does it mean to a society in which half of the population is aged over 60 and could partially remain in active workforce? This being the case, would people still decide to dedicate their first two decades only to education, the next four decades exclusively to career and parenting, and the last 40 years solely to leisure, awaiting eventual death at 100 or so? So, it is up to the younger generation to make economic sense of people living longer in the future, seeing the aging population less as a burden than a bonus. In otheer words, if older people could keep working for more years, gains in people's lifespan should not necessarily cause economic losses to society. Neither should possible costs of public health measures, disease preventions, improved living conditions and better medical interventions be considered as a 'waste of money'.

　　Inevitably, the phenomenon of the aging population will become a new reality--socially as well as economically. Both generations, the younger and the older, could somehow be expected to work together side by side and all members of society should in diverse ways contribute to the well-being of the whole country. Besides, on second thought, who is afraid of the responsibility for the aging population?