Reflecting on the societal attitudes towards elderly individuals, it’s striking how contradictory our perceptions can be. Many people around 70 to 80 years old are often considered too frail or mentally deteriorated to hold regular jobs anymore. Yet, paradoxically, those same individuals are frequently seen in positions of immense power, such as political leaders or influential economic decision-makers. From personal observation, it seems this discrepancy stems partly from traditions that associate age with wisdom and experience, assuming elder leaders inherently possess superior judgment. However, as we all have experienced, cognitive and physical decline can vary greatly among individuals over 70. In my community, I've encountered many active elders who maintain sharp intellect and vibrant involvement in various activities well beyond typical retirement age. Their contributions are valuable but often undervalued due to societal biases. Conversely, some who hold high offices may not always demonstrate the vigor or adaptability one might expect for their critical roles. This contradiction raises important questions about how we assess capability and worth at different ages. Instead of blanket assumptions tied to age, a more nuanced, individualized evaluation might better serve both societal needs and respect for our elderly population. Ultimately, this topic encourages a reflection on ageism and challenges us to reconsider what we expect and accept from people in different life stages, particularly in leadership and everyday working lives.