|
The poll is too black and white.
I wouldn't want to live in a country that viewed its people as a resource to be kept alive till they couldn't work due to old age and then left them with no healthcare. We need to be better than that.
I also disagree with the inclination that people want to live no matter what the condition. There are many people who want to live if they have a reasonable quality of life in old age but not if the conditions are poor. Not many want to be hooked up to a machine and lay in bed for the last few years of their life. But who are you to say they can't and if you turned off the machine against that persons will, how are you not a murderer? Because you are saving money for the government?
The choice should be on the person.
|
On January 24 2013 14:04 docvoc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2013 14:01 Larkin wrote:On January 24 2013 13:56 Parnage wrote:
You know, I..I don't even know what the hell is wrong with a person to think that it's okay to say "Yeah no, we can't waste resources on you, time for you to die" Screw the money, how about the morality. Who's got the nads to be the one to say who can live and who can die and at what point is it just "too much of a burden"? Whoever they are I can only hope they never get any real power because history is littered with despots and madmen who thought that he had the right to judge who lives and dies and rather or not someone was useful to society. 1. Morality isn't real. 2. It's not about the person in charge deciding, it's about democracy. The will of the people. Should people decide a "cut off point" for the elderly. Are you kidding me? Morality isn't real? Are you going to neglect thousands of years of philosophical works on the subject in 3 words? Give me a break dude. It isn't about democracy either (democracy only exists with the morals of people, that is to say people have to have the moral reasoning to demand they have a say in their representation). Democracy doesn't decide if there is a cut off point, backroom politics does that.
Yes, yes I am. Morality is contained within the ventromedial prefrontal cortex of the brain. When this part of the brain is isolated with electricity the person's morality is completely altered. It is also noted that this cortex is never identical in people. So there is no objective morality, only a subjective one. Morality is something material and constructed.
Brilliant thing about philosophy is that it's constantly being argued against. Trust me, I study it. I bet you won't accept that our actions are predetermined, either.
And that's not what we're talking about. We're saying that, in a democracy, the government should be the extension of the peoples' will. Obviously this doesn't happen in practice. But we're hypothesising that it is in this situation, and as such asking whether the people should decide on this "cut off point".
|
On January 24 2013 13:13 Shady Sands wrote:
Fuck aging population, has nobody noticed how disturbing this image is?
Holy shit. I knew it was bad, but not THAT bad. Pay 2-4 times more for healthcare in America than anywhere else and you will receive the same life expectancy as that of the Czech Republic. If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada.
You may hate socialism but this is the effect when you don't care about it, capitalism gone mad.
|
How dependant is Japan's high GDP on the aging generation? Once they do die is Japan going to have a large depression as result, or a growth spurt with the costly generation being dead? The impression I got from your post is that these costly elderly make up a large portion of the population; is that accurate?
Since Japan is doing so well in spite of their rising health care costs for the elderly what are the rammifications of gaining the extra money if they do lower their costs on the elderly's health care-- where will that money be allocated instead; in what area are they doing relatively poorly?
|
This is the problem with the government trying to pay for people's medical care.
People should pay for their own medical care. If you are super rich and want to use that wealth to prolong your life as much as possible, so be it, it's your money.
However society can't simply not afford to spend more and more of its resources keeping non-productive (in terms of economic) members of society going pure for the sake of keeping them going.
You want health care? Buy it with your own money IMO.
You could also give everyone a health care stipened, like society can afford to give you $xyz amount a year, if you that keeps you alive and healthy fine. Anything above that is your own responsibility. That would cover the vast majority of everyone.
One 98 year old lady who is completely bed ridden and has dementia shouldn't be receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from tax payers to keep her alive just "cuz"
|
On January 24 2013 14:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:Fuck aging population, has nobody noticed how disturbing this image is? Holy shit. I knew it was bad, but not THAT bad. Pay 2-4 times more for healthcare in America than anywhere else and you will receive the same life expectancy as that of the Czech Republic. If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada. You may hate socialism but this is the effect when you don't care about it, capitalism gone mad.
What do you mean?
|
On January 24 2013 14:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:Fuck aging population, has nobody noticed how disturbing this image is? Holy shit. I knew it was bad, but not THAT bad. Pay 2-4 times more for healthcare in America than anywhere else and you will receive the same life expectancy as that of the Czech Republic. If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada. You may hate socialism but this is the effect when you don't care about it, capitalism gone mad.
Also neglected is the quality of care. Capitalism brings better care and shorter lines
|
On January 24 2013 13:50 Telcontar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2013 13:44 MysteryMeat1 wrote:
I dont want to live past 80. Actually i don't want to live past the age where i can't do anything. For some people like my grandpa who is 85 and can walk fine as long as he has a cane. Thats fine but the moment i can't get out of the house put me out of my misery. You can be past 80 and still be very functional & healthy. It just depends on how you've lived and how well you took care of yourself.
clarified that in the middle of my post >.<
However the problem with that is that you have to set up guidelines and commities to develop a test that literally is life or death. If you fail the test then you will be put down. It seems kind of harsh.
|
On January 24 2013 13:52 Bagration wrote:
"Hurry up and die" is a very callous thing to say. I understand that there are huge economic implications at stake, and that the elderly do pose huge financial costs upon society. But rather than think of old people as just societal leeches, remember that many of them are parents, grandparents, great-aunts and uncles to their loved ones. Yes, economics is important, but is a society that places greater value of saving a few thousand dollars to end a life earlier over having a child have a few extra years with their grandparent really one we want to live in?
It's a very complicated issue, but it is ultimately a human issue. That being said, the words in OP's poll "at any cost" cause me to hesitate, since it brings in the possibility of extreme cases.
Let their kids / grandkids / whatever decide and fund their health costs then.
I know my parent's costs when they age older and eventually fail is something I would be saving up for. If you're poor, then tough luck.
|
There seems to be some confusion within the OP -- while retirement and healthcare costs are concepts that are linked, they are not the same issue. Japanese elderly are some of the healthiest and most active around, and continue to participate in economic activities, in large part assisted by extended post-retirement contracts with their original company, originating from the traditional (and fading) lifetime employment model. Furthermore, pension reform in 2004 has shifted towards a defined-contribution model, which has significantly reduced the intergenerational fiscal burden.
Healthcare, however, is another issue entirely. While nationalized insurance (and not-for-profit healthcare) have done wonders to keep costs low, the government is absorbing ~70% of the healthcare costs, which may not prove sustainable in the long run. Much of this ties back into the fiscal health of the Japanese government, which, apart from the shrinking fertility rate, is at the mercy of prevailing economic conditions, which have been...less than amazing for the past 2 decades.
|
On January 24 2013 14:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:Fuck aging population, has nobody noticed how disturbing this image is? Holy shit. I knew it was bad, but not THAT bad. Pay 2-4 times more for healthcare in America than anywhere else and you will receive the same life expectancy as that of the Czech Republic. If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada. You may hate socialism but this is the effect when you don't care about it, capitalism gone mad.
Czech Republic is a really nice country... beautiful cities (for the most part) and countryside, friendly intelligent people, relatively low crime and high literacy... like most central European nations. Seems like you're belittling it.
|
On January 24 2013 14:25 Larkin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2013 14:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:On January 24 2013 13:13 Shady Sands wrote: Fuck aging population, has nobody noticed how disturbing this image is? Holy shit. I knew it was bad, but not THAT bad. Pay 2-4 times more for healthcare in America than anywhere else and you will receive the same life expectancy as that of the Czech Republic. If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada. You may hate socialism but this is the effect when you don't care about it, capitalism gone mad. Czech Republic is a really nice country... beautiful cities (for the most part) and countryside, friendly intelligent people, relatively low crime and high literacy... like most central European nations. Seems like you're belittling it.
he's just basing it off the chart guys....
literally, us is paying a few times more on healthcare than czech but having the same life expectancy.
|
I think it should be made easier for people to choose to die a painless, dignified death, with the support of loved ones and doctors. This "keep the patient alive at all costs" is insane. Technology allows us to live well; we should use it to die well also.
|
On January 24 2013 14:29 fluidin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2013 14:25 Larkin wrote:On January 24 2013 14:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:On January 24 2013 13:13 Shady Sands wrote: Fuck aging population, has nobody noticed how disturbing this image is? Holy shit. I knew it was bad, but not THAT bad. Pay 2-4 times more for healthcare in America than anywhere else and you will receive the same life expectancy as that of the Czech Republic. If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada. You may hate socialism but this is the effect when you don't care about it, capitalism gone mad. Czech Republic is a really nice country... beautiful cities (for the most part) and countryside, friendly intelligent people, relatively low crime and high literacy... like most central European nations. Seems like you're belittling it. he's just basing it off the chart guys.... literally, us is paying a few times more on healthcare than czech but having the same life expectancy.
Well his repeated use of the word "bad" creates the wrong impression.
|
If you blame western diet/genetics, well then just look at Australia, Italy, Canada.
Sorry, but you need to find and link some sort of source to make a statement like that. I'm willing to bet that the US population's diet and lifestyles are much worse than those countries.
|
soon as im in a diaper and someone else has to wipe my ass...freaking kill me already... unless you make my worst child that always acted like an ass be my official ass wiper.
|
On January 24 2013 14:34 MaestroSC wrote:
soon as im in a diaper and someone else has to wipe my ass...freaking kill me already... unless you make my worst child that always acted like an ass be my official ass wiper.
That's your choice, but you can't force it on everyone.
|
On January 24 2013 14:34 MaestroSC wrote:
soon as im in a diaper and someone else has to wipe my ass...freaking kill me already... unless you make my worst child that always acted like an ass be my official ass wiper.
Yes make yourself become dependend on the child that never loved you ... very smart 
OT: All i can say is Capitalism at it's finest, human lives have become but a production number and it is all about fictive money that is not really there to begin with.
|
On January 24 2013 14:31 Mothra wrote:
I think it should be made easier for people to choose to die a painless, dignified death, with the support of loved ones and doctors. This "keep the patient alive at all costs" is insane. Technology allows us to live well; we should use it to die well also.
Indeed. Perhaps rather than deny life-preserving care to folks who will never recover, we could make it more appealing for them to choose not to keep going. That way, we're not forcing anyone who wants to live to die, but maybe we can still keep costs under control.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On January 24 2013 13:44 MysteryMeat1 wrote:
I dont want to live past 80. Actually i don't want to live past the age where i can't do anything. For some people like my grandpa who is 85 and can walk fine as long as he has a cane. Thats fine but the moment i can't get out of the house put me out of my misery.
Honestly having severely reduced mobility isn't that terrible, certainly not bad enough to give up on life over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2011/04/us%20health%20care%20costs-thumb-600x326-47611.png)
