My first thought upon reading the essays was that they seemed to describe both a de facto and a de jure marginalization of the older population. De jure: Much of the hardships brought on to the older population are a result of policies that don't properly economically support them. Pensions don't last long enough. . . healthcare doesn't cover enough. . . it's too expensive too live outside of a retirement home. . . etc. De facto:  Retirement homes whisk retirees out of society making it impossible to have an impact. Even someone living within society is a pariah and not respected. The technology boom has left the older population behind, making it so the younger generations do not respect the older generations' knowledge. Technology will continue to develop - probably at a faster rate than now - what will make the new generations respect us when we are old? The older population is a colony to the rest of society. 

It is necessary to innovate to aide the older population to participate in society. As the world population continues to grow, it will be impossible to support that many non-participants. The older population is already under-supported, what happens when there are twice as many of them? We need to find ways to increase people's working spans, and to aide them in contributing to society. We need to create programs that help them adapt to changing technology. We need to integrate them back into society and give them the tools to have power over their lives - or just kill people when they turn 65.