Should old die for sake of young?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/tayside_and_central/7316273.stm ^

[metmom]

The young will be old someday. It’s doing them no favors.

[socialismisinsidious]

Socialized Medicine aka Universal Health Care PING LIST

FReepmail me if you want to be added to or removed from this ping list.

[Hildy]

Mr. Silverback...with all due respect...You are a zealous nut. I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW WE’RE GOING TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS. Not a crazy ass question...but then again..I’m not the crazy ass.

[taxcontrol]

Insurance is a private contract where a person pays out of their pocket over time and the insurance provider takes the risk of a given group of people will produce more income than expenses. Even this becomes self-regulating as a person moves from one group into a higher expense group, the insurance company will then adjust the premiums.

[Mr. Silverback]

Mr. Silverback...with all due respect...You are a zealous nut.

First, thank you for the compliment. If a person like you sees a person like me as a zealous nut, that means I'm right on track. I mean, God forbid we should have medical reform while valuing life, right? Seriously, when have you ever been in a discussion related to end-of-life care issues on this site where you said the patient in question should live? Can you point me to a post where you proposed or endorsed a reform plan that would take the funding burden off taxpayers without witholding medical care?

Second, I reiterate: If what you cared about was funding, you would not have been opposed to using a $2 pill to help vegetative patients, and you would not be one of FR's foremost supporters of this guy...

Second, Michael Schiavo has been acting so weird he makes Hunter S. Thompson look like Joe Friday. If we believe his court testimony, the timeline goes like this: Some years prior to Terri’s collapse she told him that she would never want to “live on a machine” or be a burden. Yet in 1992, his lawyer told a jury Michael might need enough money to take care of her for another half-century. Michael proclaimed from the witness stand that he would become a nurse and take care of her “for the rest of [his] life.” By 1993, he had stopped rehabilitation (which was showing promising results), had put a “Do not resuscitate” order in her chart, tried to deny her antibiotic treatment for an infection, melted down her wedding ring and euthanized her cats. In other words, he ignored what she said about being a burden, then swore in court to take on the burden, but decided a few months later it was too much of a burden.

...not only because of his transparently evil bahavior but because all the money involved was private.

[wagglebee]

Mr. Silverback...with all due respect...You are a zealous nut. I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW WE’RE GOING TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS. Not a crazy ass question...but then again..I’m not the crazy ass.

Hildy...with all due respect...if culture of death advocates were simply crazy instead of dangerous, it wouldn't be a real concern.

The question of "who will pay for non-productive members of society" has ALWAYS been an issue (civilized society takes care of its members), it is only within the last century that the culture of death has tried to change this, but I'm sure you already know this.

 

"This person suffering from hereditary
defects costs the people 60,000
Reichmarks during his lifetime. People,
that is your money. Read 'New People'."

---

[Hildy]

wagglebee...we’re not talking about anyhing else but how, as a society, we are going to pay for our ever increasing aging society. I don’t think that is an outrageous question. We have the technology to keep people alive far longer than social security and medicare was set up to cover. Am I right, or am I wrong? So again, my question becomes, how are we going to pay for all of this.

I answered respectfully, and all I ask is an honest and respectful debate.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I'm not going to call you a Nazi, so there! :o)

But it's a serious distortion to assume that your only options are (A)gazillion-dollar high-tech futile care, or (B) the geriaticide bullet (or its equivalent.)

Whatever happened to "ordinary care"?

You have a right to refuse ALL expensive "extraordinary" care and you have a right to live to the end in decent simplicity --- clean, warm, sheltered, and fed --- which doesn't cost much; costs much less, I daresay, than the care and feeding of a golden retriever.

Even if, in my case, you add a couple beers to the daily geriatric regimen.

[wagglebee]

When a government, like the UK, decides that it is going to accept responsibility for healthcare AND they take more than half or people’s incomes to pay for it, then it is there problem to figure it out.

If government is out of the deal, costs drop dramatically. Take Terri Schiavo for instance, the ANNUAL healthcare costs for a person living at home with a feeding tube is approximately $31,000. This is a lot of money, but not so much that many families would be unable to afford it. The Schindlers were willing and able to do this, her death was never about who could afford to pay for her care.

[Hildy]

But if the government isn’t involved in it, meaning some kind of public policy...and if it is a responsibility of the family, don’t you think you’ll see many more older people not getting the care they need because of the cost? I mean if it is a decision to be made by the family only. Honestly, $31,000 a year is alot of money to most people.

I want to be clear, I believe it should be a family decision, but with that comes some very touchy issues....any way you look at it, it’s going to be a mess. That we can agree on...correct?

[FormerACLUmember]

Euthanasia is highly cost effective. Ask any democrat. Murdering frail, sick old people is one of their sacred tenents, along (of course) murdering babies. Butchering the delenseless is the core belef of their evil political party.

[Dr.Syn]

Get ready for national healthcare.

[dfwgator]

[qam1]

>Poor baby——cry me a river. What a whining post.

>>So, let me get this straight: Someone objects to out-of-control spending that they never authorized, never received any benefit from but will be expected to pay out the nose for, and that's whining?

Yeah! What he said..

[MrB]

What’s “medical funding reform” besides “word salad pablum that sounds good to the masses”?

Do you mean government price regulation?
Socialized medicine?
Single payer?
Required health insurance?
Mandatory coverage?

When you get specific, we’ll tell you whats wrong with it.

And most of the solutions WILL lead to rationing - any non-market solution WILL lead to rationing, it’s axiomatic.

Rationing means those that are “too expensive” won’t get care. And that means people will die.

[Paved Paradise]

It has nothing to do with the Reformation. This is simply post-modernism at its finest and it’s infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church as well.

[Paved Paradise]

Ah, Mrs. Don-o, you are, as always, right on.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Bravo to your grandfather. There's no need to submit to the months or years of hassles, nausea, expense, anxieties, and discomforts of aggressive surgery/radiation/chemo for cancer if you're really old and you'd really rather just coast out naturally.

This is not the same as malign medical neglect by the family or the state, nor is it the same as euthanasia. It's just saying, "I, like everybody, have a lifespan, and I'm just going to live it." Simple as that.

[Mr. Silverback]

Qam, after Mears sends me his credit card numbers, is there anything you’d like as a finder’s fee? I could grab something off of Amazon or eBay for you.

[floriduh voter]

The Fla legislature is CONSIDERING CUTTING OFF HOSPICE PAYMENTS. That would be a step in the right direction if some hospices are killing people who aren't terminal and collecting on the State's dime. Seriesly, this is HUGH if hospices get cut off and not a moment too soon. People really dying died all the time before there were hospices.

To keep them from making on money THROUGH VOLUME, the profiteering is out of the death care system in Florida. I hope they cut them where it hurts.