Tom Kamber

Guess what I spent seven hours doing yesterday? Installing a wireless router and back-up device for my two computers! The machine--called the Time Capsule--is produced by Apple and is supposed to be a cinch to install. Apparently not. It took the entire day, plus four calls to Apple, one call to Canon, two calls to Vonage, and dozens of Web searches before I got the whole thing figured out.

My data are now backed up, which is the important thing, but I did learn a few lessons:

• Even Apple machines can be a pain to configure at times. Apple has a reputation for simplicity (the Time Machine doesn't even bother with an on-off switch--they assume if you have it plugged in, you want it on), but in my case, things were not so simple. I was linking a MacBook Air laptop to an HP desktop (two different companies and technology platforms), and wanted to link in a Canon printer and Vonage telephone to boot. I seem to have everything working now, except I finally just gave up on the Vonage phone and cancelled the account. I use my cell phone 24/7 anyway.
• Apple tech support really is better quality. The difference in professionalism between the Apple tech people and the ones that picked up the phone at Canon and Vonage was night-and-day.
• Whenever you do anything to set up or configure a computer, printer, backup device, etc., assume a whole day on the phone. This seemed like a simple job but took three times longer than I expected--I can only imagine some of my senior friends dealing with all the troubleshooting and technical problems!

In the end, it was worth it. All my data backed up just fine once I got everything set up, and my wireless signal is stronger with the new device as well.

I hear about problems like this from the seniors at OATS all the time, and I always tell them just to expect hours and hours on the phone with tech support, but that things usually get working fine in the tend. For those of you going through similar aggravation, feel free to call us at the office. We might not be able to solve your specific computer problem, but we can definitely sympathize with how it feels to be on the phone with tech support all day!

Sunday's New York Times editorial offers a stunning example of the degree to which age discrimination is accepted in America today. Here's what the editors wrote:

"Senator John McCain is 71 years old, a survivor of an aggressive form of skin cancer. If elected, he would be the oldest man to become president. These factors are not disqualifying, but they impose on Mr. McCain a larger duty than usual to provide detailed, timely disclosure about his health." Read the full editorial here.

Certainly, Senator McCain's health--like that of any candidate for the presidency--is a legitimate topic for campaign discussion and voluntary disclosure, and the fact that he recently survived a bout with cancer is a fair question for public concern.

But the fact that the Times chose to conflate a discussion of the candidate's physical capabilities to do the job with an emphasis on his advanced age is offensive and discriminatory.

If Mr. McCain were an applicant for a job at the newspaper, they could legitimately ask if he knew of any physical limitations that might affect his ability to perform the required duties. But to ask him how old he is would be to invite a lawsuit under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act for illegal age-related discrimination. In essence, Mr. McCain is applying to the voters for a job, and the Times is encouraging us to use an illegal discriminatory standard to judge his fitness for the position.

Last year the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission received over 19,000 complaints of age-related job discrimination and collected $66 million in fines from offenders. Age discrimination in employment is epidemic in America. It's sad to see The New York Times setting such a bad example for its readers.

Older workers may be riding to the rescue of the American economy, but as yesterday's Wall Street Journal points out, we're not quite ready to accept their help. People who want to work past the traditional age of retirement face "financial time-bombs," according to the Journal: punitive Social Security taxes, reduced pension benefits, and loss of Medicare eligibility.

Seniors between the ages of 62 and 65 who receive Social Security are nailed with a 50 percent tax on their benefits if they remain in the workforce. And if their employers offer medical coverage, seniors who are otherwise eligible for Medicare can't take advantage of the public program--creating a major disincentive for businesses to hire older workers. Pension rules can be even worse, permanently docking older workers who shift to part-time positions in order to keep contributing on the job.

Make no mistake, we need these people participating in our economy. Donald Kohn from the Federal Reserve Board testified before Congress last year regarding the projected economic consequences of the growing portion of older individuals in our population. Federal Reserve models indicate an important link between workforce participation by older people and overall national economic productivity.

With the IRS poised to mail 130 million economic stimulus checks to American taxpayers next week, it's surprising that the critical role of seniors in our economy gets so little attention. And for seniors who spend more time in cubicles than on cruise ships, it's too bad we can't find ways to offer them support instead of "financial time-bombs."