was/is

n::would probably say "He's about 65 by now", which is a far more common usage, rather than "He'll be about 65 by now"::

Again, frequency has nothing to do with the topic above. We are talking about remoteness and proximity in time, hypothetical reference and social relations. Please, stay on topic.

And "He'll be about 65 by now" has nothing to do with future time.

<And "He'll be about 65 by now" has nothing to do with future time. >

I agree.

Consider also:

I wanted to speak to you today.
I want to speak to you today.

Do both those express a desire at the moment of speaking, IYO? Why would you use one over the other?

>>And "He'll be about 65 by now" has nothing to do with future time.<<

I meant not future time from the perspective of the present, but rather that of some point in the past (with the "future" time being the present). One way or another, it is not what I would naturally use at all, which would be "He'd be about 65 by now" (even "He's about 65 by now" doesn't sound quite right to me due to the use of "by now" rather than just "now").

The thing, though, is that maybe the "by now" part is why I perceive it as unnatural, as saying "He'll be about 65 now" sounds far more natural to me. My guess is that "by now" refers to any point in time between some point in the past and the present, and just "now" refers to simply the present alone, and for some reason "would" seems to fit such better than "will".

<<My guess is that "by now" refers to any point in time between some point in the past and the present, and just "now" refers to simply the present alone, and for some reason "would" seems to fit such better than "will". >>


I agree.