If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I don't intend to die of old age, but then I have no descendants who would regret each day I went "too soon"
descendants arent the only people that care.
Id support anyones right to do what they felt in their heart was the best thing for them. I would never be ok with the governmenrt making that decision FOR people
Story
I think the mistake that this thread makes is claiming that because something might be an economic truth, it is therefore an ethical argument. You can use economics to inform ethics, but it's not the basis of it. So there might not be any economic argument against the proposal, but that doesn't say anything about the morality of it. The moral case for allowing individual freedom of choice is well-founded and there would have to be some pretty big problems in society to create an ethical dilemma where killing off a huge section of the population was possibly the most ethical solution. I don't think a slight strain on the healthcare budget of a first world country where everyone is fed, housed and educated quite cuts it.
But if you want an argument against it based on economics, the resulting economic damage caused by the riots and uprising against such a tyrannical government would be far more damaging than any savings made on the healthcare bill.
So we are making a cost benefit judgement on the cost saving vs the loss of economic value the over 72 provide, without any substantial way of measuring what that value is. Certainly if we were to be in a N. Korea situation the difference is a lot more stark, you are basically having to make a decision on who eats and who dies.
I don't see why. Economics is (or should be) simply the study of how things work economically. If we do X the result is Y. It's up to ethics to decide if Y is a desirable outcome. It shouldn't be mistaken for economic policy, which is actually politics.
... or if X is an acceptable action