Why do we keep old people around?

MonacoMonkey's picture
Rank: Neanderthal | 2,232

Back before the internet and modern digital age, it was understandable. Old people could pass down tips of wisdom and general life lessons they amassed over their long lives. Everything from basic knowledge (such as apple seeds being poisonous) to insight into the local community (such as the best way to prepare dishes, good local restaurants, etc).

But now with everything so widely available online and in our pockets in an instant, is there really a need? In fact, one can argue it's become more of a burden than an asset.

Consider the average wage-earning American family, living paycheck to paycheck. Grandma Beatrice is 90 years old, while her 3 grandkids are burdened with student loans, and the family is struggling to meet mortgage payments. One day, granny suffers from a stroke, and the cost to prolong her life (acute stent operation, post-procedure recovery, nursing home, etc etc) is estimated at $250k. The doctor estimates that she could live for another 2 years in a best-case scenario.

Is the marginal extension of life (living until 92 instead of meeting the reaper at 90) really worth the cost? Arguably, the money would be much better spent on younger people who have decades ahead of them.

I come from a family of doctors, and the stories I hear at the dinner table are really troubling. You'd be surprised at how much money is poured into saving the very old, just to live for an extra few years (sometimes months, and sometimes weeks). Economically, it does not make sense for the average family. Sentimentally, it is hard to justify. If I was 90 and in Beatrice's position, I'd gladly (and voluntarily) give the money to my grandkids and end my life. To do anything otherwise is irresponsible and downright selfish. If not for their immediately family, but for society as a whole through higher insurance premiums.

Comments (106)

Best Response
Sep 7, 2017

Do you just walk around looking at the elderly and thinking--there's not enough ROI there to justify the medical expenses...Anyone over 90 should just kill themselves

    • 40
    • 1
Sep 7, 2017

ha, this was really funny.

Sep 8, 2017
timetogetserious:

Do you just walk around looking at the elderly and thinking--there's not enough ROI there to justify the medical expenses...Anyone over 90 should just kill themselves

This reminds me of The Giver and what OP is describing is something you would think of if you've stared at spreadsheets for too long that you've completely lost touch with reality and have no moral fiber left.

Interesting proposition but OP...if this was your own mother or father and someone said this to you how would you react?

    • 3
Sep 7, 2017

If we put a bullet in anyone with a negative NPV for society. --35% of America would be dead tommorrow.

    • 7
Sep 8, 2017

They have, and I reacted fine. My parents are both in medicine (non American) and have told me countless times that the fear of death in this country is insane and leads to vegetables being on life support for years at a time.

They expressed hope that by the time they reached that state of life, euthanasia would be an accepted medical procedure but if it isn't either would be happy to do it themselves.

Life's not that special. Americans, for some reason, thinks the universe revolves around them. No, you're not going to get "precious moments" from being a bedsore covered 92 year old with tubes sticking out of them who shits himself constantly. Is that really your ambition? Live as long as possible, quality of life not a part of the equation?

Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Sep 10, 2017

this deserves like 10000 sb LOLOL. made my day. thanks

Sep 7, 2017

This is up to individual families to decide. The problem is with the insurance & medical system. Nobody considers the costs.

heister:

Look at all these wannabe richies hating on an expensive salad.

    • 2
Sep 7, 2017

"Grandpa, thanks for storming Normandy and preventing the Germans from taking over the world. Also, thanks for raising mom, finally, thanks for the memories when I was a child. Love you!

Ok now lets unplug him, old fuck is going make me have to step down into an A6 if we keep him going much longer."

Nice reminder to get a living will. I agree, I wouldn't want to be a burden on my family, however, if they have the resources to pay, let them.

    • 8
Sep 8, 2017

These kinds of rationales make no sense. If an old person is sick and in the hospital, not sure how keeping them there in misery="I love you for all the hard sacrifices you made for me". It's selfish to keep them around, because it only helps yourself feel like you are a pillar in society for doing everything you can for this person. Just let them go like Hailee Steinfeld says.

Sep 7, 2017

If they are coherent and want to be alive why should they just have to expire due to age? If they want to go into hospice or fight it until the end that is up to them.

If they are vegetative or at the end with Alzheimer's/dementia, that is a different story (living will reference). At that point it is up to the family and is a difficult decision for some.

Sep 7, 2017
MonacoMonkey:

Back before the internet and modern digital age, it was understandable. Old people could pass down tips of wisdom and general life lessons they amassed over their long lives. Everything from basic knowledge (such as apple seeds being poisonous) to insight into the local community (such as the best way to prepare dishes, good local restaurants, etc).

But now with everything so widely available online and in our pockets in an instant, is there really a need? In fact, one can argue it's become more of a burden than an asset.

Consider the average wage-earning American family, living paycheck to paycheck. Grandma Beatrice is 90 years old, while her 3 grandkids are burdened with student loans, and the family is struggling to meet mortgage payments. One day, granny suffers from a stroke, and the cost to prolong her life (acute stent operation, post-procedure recovery, nursing home, etc etc) is estimated at $250k. The doctor estimates that she could live for another 2 years in a best-case scenario.

Is the marginal extension of life (living until 92 instead of meeting the reaper at 90) really worth the cost? Arguably, the money would be much better spent on younger people who have decades ahead of them.

I come from a family of doctors, and the stories I hear at the dinner table are really troubling. You'd be surprised at how much money is poured into saving the very old, just to live for an extra few years (sometimes months, and sometimes weeks). Economically, it does not make sense for the average family. Sentimentally, it is hard to justify. If I was 90 and in Beatrice's position, I'd gladly (and voluntarily) give the money to my grandkids and end my life. To do anything otherwise is irresponsible and downright selfish. If not for their immediately family, but for society as a whole through higher insurance premiums.

psycho

"If you always put limits on everything you do, physical or anything else, it will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them." - Bruce Lee

    • 3
Sep 7, 2017

Pretty much. When dollars are greater than lives it signals trouble.

    • 1
Sep 7, 2017

lives are cheap and renewable

heister:

Look at all these wannabe richies hating on an expensive salad.

    • 3
Sep 7, 2017

You may be right that it doesn't mathematically make sense to provide care for elderly people. But humanity is not defined in dollars and cents, in economic efficiency.

Sep 7, 2017

This country would be better off euthanizing young idiots than adults who have contributed to society.

Honestly, WSO, this is the level of autistic, stupid, drivel that is shit out more often than not. I have the urge to read 50 pages of a technical book just to offset the brain damage I get from the vast majority of posts on this site.

We have the worlds information at our fingertips, yet people are less intelligent than they were 50 years ago. Sure, we can do cool tricks with technology, but kids nowadays need baby diapers up until the age of 25.

Stupid old people. If only they took out $200K in student loans studying a major you could have learned from spending time in a library and then complain about the lack of opportunity or how older people "had it easier".

We do not kill old people because once you go down this route, you become a nazi ( in the actual sense, not the butthurt snowflake sense). Read up on Eugenics to see that this idea has been tied. I am sure plenty of old people know about this and have either lived and survived people who had this "brilliant" idea or fought and gave their lives to stop the people who thought this was a "brilliant" idea.

Oh wait, you knew all this because you are young and have the power of knowledge at your fingertips. Opps, you actually didn't know this and made a fucking stupid ass post.

As for your side point on the amount of money spent on the last years and months of life, there is some truth to this. We do a poor job of accepting death and focus on prolonging life rather than maximizing the quality of life. But that is a personal decision and the way our healthcare system is set up, people can take advantage of all the hail mary's in life.

Sep 7, 2017
TNA:

This country would be better off euthanizing young idiots than adults who have contributed to society.

Honestly, WSO,
Stupid old people. If only they took out $200K in student loans studying a major you could have learned from spending time in a library and then complain about the lack of opportunity or how older people "had it easier".

I liked this post but it WAS the old people who made college more expensive while at the same time making it more affordable. Granted not all of them, but it was some of them.

However when you get to 25 you have to stop blaming other people for your failures. I want to start a charity that buys copies of "Extreme Ownership" and gives them to college kids and Antifa.

Sep 7, 2017
TNA:

As for your side point on the amount of money spent on the last years and months of life, there is some truth to this. We do a poor job of accepting death and focus on prolonging life rather than maximizing the quality of life. But that is a personal decision and the way our healthcare system is set up, people can take advantage of all the hail mary's in life.

The funny part about OP's post is that he said he comes from a 'family of doctors'.

So basically, despite OP's negative view of the subject, his family profited on this facet of our society, most likely enabling him to get a chance in finance.

"If you always put limits on everything you do, physical or anything else, it will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them." - Bruce Lee

    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

There are two sides.

It is hard to decide at what point we let people die if we have the means to keep them alive, because at what point would we stop? What would be our trade off, 3 years? 7 years?

But also, I suppose there is a trade-off between the life and the expense required.

    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

Presumably you would implement a system such that there were incentives in place for elderly people to evaluate the value of their remaining years. I agree making it government mandated would be too totalitarian and could be open to all kinds of corruption (manipulating rules to change voter demographics comes to mind). But a system in which individuals could decide that their cost to society is greater than the benefit (tax breaks for their families as an example) might be workable.

    • 3
Sep 8, 2017

I do not think you should malign people for trying to start a discussion about an issue on which they have an opinion, particularly one that is as incendiary as this one. I agree that there is a fair amount of "drivel" on this site but that is what this is, a place for people (generally those interested in finance) to come share opinions, seek feedback and evaluate arguments. Like anything else, most of the products of this exercise are crap. But, every now and again, there is a solid discussion that can be enlightening. Sorting through the "drivel" to find that discussion makes finding it all the more significant.

You cannot paint every Nazi practice as abhorrent because some or even a majority of their practices were. Nazi Germany was a world power that drastically improved the German economy after it was crippled by the excessively punitive measures of the Treaty of Versailles. History is written by the winners. Nazi's got the idea for concentration camps from Native American Reservations, yet you wouldn't malign every practice of the people that implemented those would you?

Eugenics is about improving the genetic quality of the human population, much as humans have done with crops and livestock. OP is referring to the euthanization of the elderly who have (presumably) already passed their genes on to their descendants.

You agree that OP had "some truth" to his post and that humans "do a poor job of accepting death and focus on prolonging life rather than maximizing the quality of life" yet you still called it a "fucking stupid ass post." In my opinion, any post that begets such lively discussion is not stupid and I'd like to thank OP for starting it.

    • 5
    • 4
Sep 7, 2017
<span class=keyword_link><a href=http://tinyurl.com/3ho2nmo target=_blank rel=nofollow>Draper</a></span> Specter and Co.:

You cannot paint every Nazi practice as abhorrent because some or even a majority of their practices were. Nazi Germany was a world power that drastically improved the German economy after it was crippled by the excessively punitive measures of the Treaty of Versailles. History is written by the winners. Nazi's got the idea for concentration camps from Native American Reservations, yet you wouldn't malign every practice of the people that implemented those would you?

Eugenics is about improving the genetic quality of the human population, much as humans have done with crops and livestock. OP is referring to the euthanization of the elderly who have (presumably) already passed their genes on to their descendants.

You're completely right (sarcasm).

Lets improve the quality of the human race (sarcasm).

Lets kill all the feeble, all the LD people, anyone with issues that society deems is not quality. Lets abort all who do not have financial resources, kill all the elderly, diseased, and those with terminal illnesses (sarcasm).

The main question here is, who determines what is ''''quality'''''?

"If you always put limits on everything you do, physical or anything else, it will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them." - Bruce Lee

    • 1
    • 1
Sep 10, 2017

Well it's not a good thread until some fucking twat starts defending Nazi eugenics.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."

    • 2
    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

I think this is a misread on the OP. I read, "why do we (as in the personal usage, as in us individuals) choose to keep old people in our lives?" I think it's a fair point to be discussed. If the idea is to institutionalize the process of ridding the country of old people, I want no part. But I think it's morally correct to ask the question of, "why do we do it?"

    • 1
Sep 10, 2017

If that's what he meant, he's had plenty of time to clarify.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."

Mar 7, 2018

"We do not kill old people because once you go down this route, you become a nazi"

^ keep in mind that many prominent people in German society supported the National Socialists, including professors, politicians, doctors, and otherwise highly educated individuals.

It's only after they [the Germans/Axis] lost the war that being a "nazi" is a blanket negative term.

yes, they did some bad things, but we cannot let that undo their numerous contributions to society.

in fact, the US government agreed to offer IMMUNITY to the German (Nazi) scientists in return for their medical tests on humans. our (American) hands are not as clean as we believe.

    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

"Old people need to be isolated and studied so it can be determined what nutrients they have that might be extracted for our personal use."

- Homer Simpson

    • 2
Sep 8, 2017

I am just speechless by reading this. This is the reason why most young people can't be given managerial or senior roles. They just lack "empathy" to others. You won't make money just by inventing the coolest apps. You need empathy, leadership skill, and vision for the future; all of which comes from having the love for your family, the love for your people and the love for life itself. When you try to justify pulling plug on your granny to save money, this is just wrong on so many levels. Simply, it shows that you are willing to screw people for your own short term benefit. This is the same type of mentality that creates corrupted CEOs who led Enron and Lehman Brothers. This is also indicative of the bro-culture we have in the today's tech world - where everyone is willing to screw others to make a quick buck. People are not stupid and they have a very long memory. If you choose to screw people just for your personal short term benefit, they are coming back to you to extract their pound of flesh.

    • 7
    • 3
Mar 7, 2018

I'm far more empathetic to my dog than any human. Even my girlfriend.

Humans are vile, reprehensible, boorish creatures that have become a cancer to the world.
And like you alluded to, greedy motherfuckers who are "willing to screw people".

So if you think "CEOs who lead Lehman" or the "bros in the tech world" deserve applause, why suddently are you speechless and defending old people?

Sep 8, 2017

Having issues with reading comprehension? I said that people who are willing to pull plug on their grannies are the same type of evil people who led Lehman Brothers and tech bros who create useless apps.

Sep 8, 2017

Okay, I think I'll pitch in.

I always thought my grandpa was an old fart, who dabbled in politics and gambled away his savings on lottery tickets. He never fought in WW2, made money through selling a local addictive drug, and wanted people he was rich by buying up a lot of unnecessary shit. He was married to my grandmother at 16-17, made 6 kids, two of whom went abroad (my uncle and dad), while the other 4 daughters ended up becoming fat broiler chickens (my aunts), who in turn ended up breeding even more. Oh, and my dad was the only one bright enough to complete college. He ended up living up to a sweet 94 yrs before passing away due to old age (and possibly cancer from chain smoking - we couldn't diagnose it as he was too weak for that).

My grandmother, looks back to the "fond" memories of the past, where child marriages and godmen and weird ass orthodox rituals were the norm. She actually enjoyed being a child bride, it seems. All she does is indulge in holy books, and complain about her withering legs. Why can't she walk? Laziness, lack of exercise and an indulgent sweet tooth put a diabetic end to her legs' motion. She's 84 now.

Sound pretty useless right? I thought so too. Until my grandfather's funeral.

When he died, the number of people who visited topped 8000. Not a typo. People had come from as far as the Gulf countries, Singapore, Malaysia, the US, UK and China to pay their respects. National politicians flew from our capital to pay their respects. Why? Turns out, all that money we thought he had gambled away, he had actually spent sending these people out of good will, not expecting a thing in return. He didn't know about investments and all, he just thought he had to give to them since he was the richer one. The number of people who rose up because of his actions is just mind-blowing. In fact, when my grandmother wanted my dad to be this religious cleric, it was he who told her to shut up, while sending him to college in the city. Truly great man, and even greater chain smoker.

As for grandmother, I used to think that she was too rooted in her old ways. But the number of prayers she has chanted for all of her grandchildren's benefits are uncountable. It actually pains me seeing her suffer with her diabetes the way she is right now.

I wonder how OP ended up managing even $300k of other people's money, by being such an insensitive, unempathetic prick in PWM. Maybe that's why he's stuck at $300k

GoldenCinderblock: "I keep spending all my money on exotic fish so my armor sucks. Is it possible to romance multiple females? I got with the blue chick so far but I am also interested in the electronic chick and the face mask chick."

    • 1
    • 2
Sep 8, 2017

Well then, I hope your family holds you to your promise of dying ASAP once they figure out the NPV of keeping you alive is negative. Don't want to be destroying any value for your family.

    • 2
    • 1
Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Sep 7, 2017

He's not saying to euthanize old people. He's talking about spending millions of dollars for weeks of life for people who are on life support, miserable, and barely conscious.

heister:

Look at all these wannabe richies hating on an expensive salad.

    • 3
    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

easy fix: make sure your legal documents are in order and your healthcare agents are informed. medical professionals are obligated to do no harm and do whatever it takes to preserve life, so unless you have documents detailing your wishes, they will do this, and therein lies the problem.

in the situation OP described, those are very expensive treatments, end of life care is basically palliative. reminds me of those cancer commercials that say "we increase your chance of being alive at 6 mos versus 3 mos" at which point I turn to my wife and say "you know if that's me, I want you to pull the plug right?" but we've gotten all that spelled out.

I hate to turn this into a diatribe on PWM and needing advice, but these are the kinds of situations that can be avoided with some unselfish planning.

    • 2
Sep 10, 2017

His post has nothing to do with old age, he is simply saying "Euthanasia should be encouraged. Albeit when the probability of death within 2 years =1"

i.e 2_p_x = 0

Sep 8, 2017

Our society is at the first step of a long path to keeping people alive. As more is invested in the technology, more improvements will occur.

Keeping old people alive in this matter is kind of like hair replacement. The methods now are crude, kinda of like the first shitty hair plugs that came.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/31/google-co-founders...

Sep 8, 2017

You will be old someday too and karma is a bi$ch

    • 1
Sep 7, 2017

No, we all stop aging at 30 and never die. You should no this by now...

Sep 8, 2017

Pretty sure there was a Futurama episode about this, except they didn't kill them but sent them to basically a giant space filing cabinet forever

Sep 8, 2017

Let's start a project on Kickstarter to see how much people are willing to pledge to get rid of people like you!!!

    • 2
Sep 8, 2017

MonacoMonkey does have a point

Sep 8, 2017

1.) This is the kind of thread that pretty much confirms the "people in finance are sociopaths" stereotype
2.) Discussing this without discussing the ridiculous cost of healthcare in this country is pointless
3.) I don't see how it is anyone's business if an individual family wants to go bankrupt in order to extend a loved ones life

    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

I have no idea why people do this to older loved ones. I honestly think it's just done because it's easier than making any choice at all. Most people can't complete their NYR they set for the year, even if it's something as simple as eating healthier. It's really seems just to be a basic inability to make a choice at all, especially when the choice is this controversial and consequential. But more to the general point you might be making, a national review of keeping the old and sick going is just weird.

    • 2
Sep 8, 2017

Yeah that makes logical sense: It's clear that the NPV when discounting for future years' output from the elderly is definitely negative. We should let them die.

Actually, lets go a step further: cripples clearly have a negative effect on society. Let's be real here, they require specific laws and infrastructure improvements just for them. If we get rid of them, then we can pass on all the savings to the rest of society.

But wait, out of this rest of society, there's clearly some that are better than others. After all, there's a bunch of people who can't see properly, they should be eliminated for everyone else's safety. A vision impaired driver is basically driving a weapon around, so this makes sense.

And speaking of sense, the uneducated should also go. As a species that has risen through the ranks on the brunt of our intelligence, these inferior members should not be allowed to reproduce because it only weakens the subsequent line of genes that result from fornication.

Now that I think about it, we should just cherry pick who to eliminate if they don't have an outstanding gift to contribute to society. I know! Let's promote a master race: I think pure blooded Aryans is a good starting point.

Sarcasm aside, do you see how quickly this kind of thinking can spiral out of control?

    • 2
Sep 8, 2017

Start with George Soros

    • 1
Sep 8, 2017

By the way, nobody is proposing "killing" the old. Some people lived to be 100 in ancient times. They can putter around all they want. "Not pulling every single trick in the book to keep someone alive regardless of consequences to them and the healthcare system" isn't "killing". It's letting nature take its course.

And for those who didn't see my earlier post, I am not a hypocrite nor do I intend to become one. My parents, both medical professionals, have expressed this opinion in regards to themselves and in fact made me promise (I am the least emotional of my siblings) that if they get into the sort of state you see people in this country in, I would absolutely let them die or even help them (hoping it doesn't come to the latter because that will probably be a felony - but they're my parents and they would've done it for me if I needed it).

One day, you will die. It's what you experience before then that matters. If your choice is to die of a stroke at 86 or be kept alive paralyzed in a hospital bed drifting in and out of consciousness in horrible pain for another five years, why the fuck would you pick the latter? I really don't understand Americans' obsession with living as long as possible when there is no living to be had, only waiting to die.

And I'm not saying "yeah, kill all the others but leave me alive." I'm asking YOU, why do YOU think a few years of being bedridden and in pain is a good proposition for YOUR DESIRES, costs aside?

And then let's not forget that this obsession does have a cost, an immense cost to our healthcare spending which could be better used elsewhere.

TL;DR Prolonging peoples' misery makes no sense whether from a purely selfish perspective or an ethical perspective, and on top of this it costs enormous amounts of money.

Sep 7, 2017
Here'sJohnny:

TL;DR Prolonging peoples' misery makes no sense whether from a purely selfish perspective or an ethical perspective, and on top of this it costs enormous amounts of money.

Catholicism prohibits it.

"If you always put limits on everything you do, physical or anything else, it will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them." - Bruce Lee

Sep 8, 2017

Yeah and Judaism makes you chop off a piece of your cock and Islam (on top of also doing that) forbids you from drinking. People have all sorts of beliefs with no rational basis. I'm sure if I knew more about Buddhists, Hindus or various animists I'd come up with some ridiculous things they believe in as well, but I only grew up around the three Abrahamic religions.

Call me cynical, but I'm inherently skeptical when some old dude on a golden throne claims that God speaks only to him. Seems like the most obvious scam in the world.

Sep 10, 2017

Ah yes, no one actually wants to stay alive...it's their evil families doing it against their will! Who could have guessed.

What a moronic comment.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."

Sep 8, 2017

If this HF thing doesn't work, you can always write headlines for Buzzfeed/Thrillist/5MM other clickbait sites. Talk about bait and switch.

Sep 7, 2017

I almost wonder if they come here to practice.

Sep 8, 2017

I quite enjoyed meeting with my grandparents near the end of their lives. Never met someone that was as happy to see me as my grandma the weeks before she died. We probably could have pulled the plug earlier, but who cares. It was her and my grandpa's money we were spending and to them, seeing all their family again was probably worth the $100k+.

Sep 8, 2017

This is ridiculous for a lot of reasons, some of which have been said.

  1. Aside from the obvious moral implications, the most glaring reason in my mind is the fact that you can't measure something/someone's purpose or right to exist just from the marginal 'productivity' or monetary value it/they are perceived to have. I must be one of the crazy people that actually cherished and looked forward to the times I saw my grandparents. It was genuinely a lot of fun to spend time with them right up until the end of their quality of life. Fishing, playing board games, sharing/preparing meals, listening to awesome stories about WWII and previous decades, etc. just to name a few. A poor comparison since a car is not a person, but I think a decent analogy is a classic car. An older/antique car doesn't go nearly as fast as newer models, is much less safe, is less efficient, is way more of a pain in the ass to maintain, and provides no objective utility other than the enjoyment it provides to the owner. So, just because they aren't directly 'contributing' to the economy doesn't mean an elderly person can't be a joy to be around and make a positive impact on society or the lives of those around them (barring any debilitating/incapacitating issue obviously).
  2. Secondly, the amount of jobs and broader sub-economy in healthcare (including OP's parents) that are bolstered or in some cases wholly sustained by the existence of the elderly is quite large. To say that they don't contribute or are no longer valuable is insane. You say that they are a liability/expense, but the first rule of accounting states that if there is a cost/liability associated with something, there has to be something on the other side of the equation to counterbalance.
  3. The United States is fortunate to have a pretty awesome quality of life attainable relative to other countries. If you are able to sustain that for a longer period of time, why would you not want to do so? Makes no sense to want to cut the party short, especially on a site of people who predominantly want to retire early and live the good life even longer than the average citizen.
  4. As @TNA mentioned, the elderly are not the issue, it's that many ignorant people don't plan/think forwardly when it comes to becoming retirement age/a senior citizen. These people were most likely drains on society long before they became elderly. The differentiation is that the U.S. essentially worships potential and youth. Even if you've squandered both for a significant portion of your life, society would view a 30-40 year old who is a complete drudge as being in a better position than an elderly person who is wise, thoughtful and was previously a contributing member of society and lived a full life. Think about it - If the Big Lebowski featured a guy doing the exact same shit, but they cast an 85 year old in the role, it would have been received very differently.
    • 3
Sep 8, 2017

There may be a lot of information on the Internet but nothing can substitute the words of advice from an elderly person with wisdom and life experience. If a person has clearly stated that they do not want to be kept on life support, perhaps the family can consider this and come to a suitable decision. But to say that old people should not be kept alive because of rising costs is not something I consider right. Just my personal opinion.

    • 1
Sep 10, 2017

Holy christ, what is this.

My generation is probably fucked. All I have to do is refresh the off-topic forum here to convince myself of that.

Ironically this pretentious, moronic post is something that someone with the wisdom acquired by living a full life over the course of 90 years would never have written.

Hope you're never in a position where someone might want to "pull the plug" to save money.

"When you stop striving for perfection, you might as well be dead."

Sep 10, 2017

"Old age gets us all, premature death is a random event. Pension should be a contract between generations, not an insurance." - TN Thiele

Sep 10, 2017

So they can get drunk and tell us their Navy stories at Red Lobster's bar.

Sep 13, 2017

I think the nature or life have its way for every living beings no matter how young or old they are. Don't know whether I could live that longer or got accidentally dead when I back home-maybe car accident or heart attack. So why not cherish or mind your own life or business? --Just my ideas.

Sep 14, 2017
Sep 14, 2017

I am pretty sure Medicare would pay for Beatrice's surgery ... not the family

Sep 15, 2017

Why do we keep people with down syndrome? Why don't we just euthanize people with low IQs? Where does the line stop?

Sep 15, 2017

Should we euthanize people from NONTARGET schools?

    • 1
Sep 7, 2017
Lloyd BIankfein:

Should we euthanize people from NONTARGET schools?

Nah, they are pretty much already dead.

"If you always put limits on everything you do, physical or anything else, it will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them." - Bruce Lee

    • 1
Feb 2, 2018

This OP is nothing more than phishing for attention. And here we are, falling for it hook, line and sinker. I don't believe the OP'er really believes in what they posted. They simply wanted a reaction.

Otherwise, this has to be one of the dumbest posts I've read in the last 12 months

Feb 2, 2018

I don't know, OP has a lot of queationable posts

Feb 2, 2018

Well there it is then. Just someone starving for attention, anyway they can get it, even if it resorting to posting the most obnoxious post they can conceive of.

The day that young people stop revering their elders is the day our society becomes doomed to failure. As a parallel to one of the most famous quotes in history: "those who do not learn from their mistakes are bound to repeat them." Googling the repercussions of genocide is a far cry from hearing first-hand accounts from those who have witnessed it firsthand. Just one of an endless number of circumstances that prove having living history is invaluable.

Mar 7, 2018

Word. Die them off quickly so we can decrease the surplus population.

Mar 7, 2018
Comment
Mar 7, 2018
Comment