Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On the Road to Death Panels ^ | October 15, 2012 | Star Parker

Posted on 10/15/2012 2:06:05 AM PDT by Kaslin

With the first presidential debate and the only vice-presidential debate behind us, it seems pretty clear that so-called "social issues" are not going to get much attention in this year's presidential politics.

It's unfortunate, I think. We deceive ourselves to permit the assumption that values and behavior are not the real drivers behind our economic problems.

The fiscal crisis of our entitlement programs is the direct result of these values and behavior.

The fiscal soundness of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is rooted in the assumption that those who work can fund the needs of our elderly through payroll taxes. In the case of Social Security, we're talking about retirement income; in the case of Medicare, health costs of the aged; and Medicaid, long-term care of low-income elderly.

When these programs were founded, using payroll taxes to fund care for our elderly seemed like a viable idea.

The bottom has fallen out, however, because of changes in our behavior. There are fewer and fewer workers per retiree as result of longer life spans and a shrinking workforce.

In 1950, there were 16 working Americans for every retiree. Today, there are fewer than three. By 2030, it's projected there will be fewer than two.

It doesn't take a supercomputer to realize that if we don't reduce the retirement and health care resources available to our elderly, the burden on each working American to provide those resources increases substantially.

Yet the discussion about this crisis is 100 percent focused on how to cut the spending and zero attention is spent on restoration of values that could rebuild families, produce more children and stop destroying the unborn.

According to a new report just out from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the overall fertility rate of American women -- defined by the number of births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 -- is the lowest ever recorded since the government started gathering this information. After years of hovering slightly above 2.1, it has now dropped below to 1.9.

According to demographers, a fertility rate of 2.1 -- in which each adult woman produces 2.1 children on average over her lifetime -- is necessary to keep the overall population steady.

Which means the overall U.S. population is shrinking.

We generally look to Europe to see low fertility rates and shrinking populations. However, according to the Economist magazine, the U.S., at 1.9, now has a fertility rate lower than France, whose fertility rate stands at 2.0.

A change in prevailing values could reverse this trend. But the opposite is happening.

According to a new Gallup poll, for the first time the majority of Americans feel that government should not promote any particular set of values.

In 1993, the first year that Gallup did this annual survey, 53 percent said that government should promote traditional values and 42 percent said that no particular set of values should be promoted. Now, in this latest survey, it is the opposite: 52 percent say no particular set of values should be promoted and 44 percent say government should promote traditional values.

With no rebirth of traditional values that could lead to more babies, caring for our elderly will become an increasingly onerous burden. Where can this soulless materialism lead?

In a Sept. 16 New York Times op-ed, Steven Rattner -- a New York investment banker and former counselor to the Treasury secretary in the Obama administration -- provided a shockingly candid answer.

The op-ed began by saying, "We need death panels."

Rattner then qualified this by saying, well, maybe not "exactly."

But, he concluded: "We may shrink from ... stomach-wrenching choices, but they are inescapable."

TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: deathpanels; debate; entitlements; healthcare

1 posted on 10/15/2012 2:06:14 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
UK: Convicted criminals recruited as carers for elderly (ObamaCare Preview?)

John P. Holdren --- Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology

".......Overpopulation was an early concern and interest. In a 1969 article, Holdren and co-author Paul R. Ehrlich argued, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come." In 1973, Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many." In 1977, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, and Holdren co-authored the textbook Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment; they discussed the possible role of a wide variety of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning to enforced population controls, including forced sterilization for women after they gave birth to a designated number of children, and discussed "the use of milder methods of influencing family size preferences" such as access to birth control and abortion.

Other early publications include Energy (1971), Human Ecology (1973), Energy in Transition (1980), Earth and the Human Future (1986), Strategic Defenses and the Future of the Arms Race (1987), Building Global Security Through Cooperation (1990), and Conversion of Military R&D (1998)......"


The Intellectual Roots of Paul Ehrlich's The Population Bomb (and the pre-prehistory of climate alarmism) [John P. Holdren collaborated with the Ehrlichs on "The Population Bomb" [1968]

2 posted on 10/15/2012 2:14:20 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I would venture to guess that the authors of most of these types of articles are a long ways off from retirement or already have a nice nest egg tucked away already. I guess when us normal folks (not wealth) have passed our age of usefulness they can just inject us with the death serum, cremate us, and send us on to the landfill.

3 posted on 10/15/2012 3:00:30 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I would venture to guess that the authors of most of these types of articles are a long ways off from retirement or already have a nice nest egg tucked away already. I guess when us normal folks (not wealth) have passed our age of usefulness they can just inject us with the death serum, cremate us, and send us on to the landfill.

4 posted on 10/15/2012 3:00:31 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001

Changes in OUR BEHAVIOUR? Excuse me Im 62 years old I have been Working since I was 12 and am still working!
I have not been in Washington Robbing a System Blind,I was in Businees for Myself for 15 years and When My I asked my accountant how I could get out of paying the self employment tax(Social Security tax),he asked me How Much time do you want to spend behind bars.
This program was started as a Retirement system for seniors,people have thought for years that they actually had an account with their name on it and their money was in there.The Politicians have been stealing that money for years,providing food Housing and Education for illegals and Now there is No money left,EXCEPT of course for these Scum sucking lying crooked Politicians and their retirement funds.
Social Security was initially sold as a Retirement fund but the Supreme court said it was Unconstitutional,so they changed it to a Tax,Sound familiar? Obamacare,both of these Ponzi schemes should never have seen the light of day. Dont worry seniors, Vote for Obama and the death Panels will take of you and the Fiscal Problems of Social Security,maybe at least they will give you a Choice as they did Edward G Robinson in the Movie Soylent Green,of your favorite Music and a Nice Film to look at as they put you to sleep

5 posted on 10/15/2012 3:18:45 AM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Plunder and death...socialism 2.0

6 posted on 10/15/2012 4:13:01 AM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I remember those 1960’s publications and the depressing conversations at the water cooler. I was a working, married woman (pregnant with my 3rd of 4 children and made to feel guilty for overpopulating) when the one kind, young gay guy in the office; offered how it was OK - I was having his share of offspring;) Yes, he had to ‘come out’ because one young woman was falling for him.

Values have changed and affected how we relate to grandparents; with so many divorces and remarriages - it’s tough to keep up with & take care of 8-10 disabled elderly, unrelated step-parents in our homes (the old Italian/Irish way).

WRT to the birth rate and number of workers. Although married, working women possible have fewer children (future contributors); they are increasing the current participation. 6 of one- 1/2 dozen of another.

7 posted on 10/15/2012 4:14:28 AM PDT by sodpoodle (Life is prickly - carry tweezers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

First step. Change the gold-plated health insurance plans enjoyed by the government-elite. They are truly insulated from the worries felt by normal people.
Second step. Give the government-elite a 1.2% increase every year when the real rate of inflation is 4%.

8 posted on 10/15/2012 4:45:43 AM PDT by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle

Many liberals who expect immigrants to fill in the gaps will be sorely disappointed by the immigrants’ likely refusal to pay high taxes for people who neither had children or savings or family loyalty to help provide for them in old age. They’ll take care of their own families and communities first; that is the natural result of the salad bowl and multi-culturalism.

9 posted on 10/15/2012 5:42:56 AM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Lets get real here for a minute. Health care has been, is now and always will be limited. We cannot give 100% healthcare to everyone. Anyone disagree with that?

The questions then is what or who limits healthcare.

Who gets to decide? Who decided in the past?

10 posted on 10/15/2012 7:00:24 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple ( (Lord, save me from some conservatives, they don't understand history any better than liberals.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin


I, _____________________________, being of sound mind and body, do not wish to be kept alive indefinitely by artificial means. Under no circumstances should my fate be put in the hands of pinhead partisan politicians who couldn’t pass ninth-grade biology if their lives depended on it, or lawyers/doctors/hospitals interested in simply running up the bills.

If, after a reasonable amount of time passes, and I fail to ask for:

(Check appropriate items) ______a Martini ______a Margarita ____ a Weller and Diet Coke______a Bloody Mary, a micro beer ______a Gin and Tonic _______a Glass of Chardonnay or a good Napa Valley Red ______a Steak ______Lobster or crab legs ______the TV remote control ______a bowl of ice cream ______the sports page______ Sex or______ Chocolate:

If it should be presumed that I won’t ever get any better and when such a determination is reached, I hereby instruct my appointed person and attending physicians to pull the plug, reel in the tubes, and call it a day.
At this point, it will be time to call the New Orleans Jazz Funeral Band to come and do their thing at my funeral, and ask all of my friends to raise their glasses to toast the good times we have had.

Signature:__________________________ Date: __________

*P.S............... I hear that in Ireland there is a Nursing Home with a Pub. The patients are happier, and they have a lot more visitors. Some of them don’t even need embalming when their time comes. If anyone knows the name of this happy place, PLEASE pass it on.

Amendment #1:
Should I become incapacitated as described above, DO NOT PULL THE PLUG until after I have voted against Barack Obama by absentee ballot in the November 2012 election. Thanks in advance.

Signature:__________________________ Date: __________

Witness Signature: _______________________________Date:_____________

11 posted on 10/15/2012 9:10:35 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (We are the 53%, who pay taxes and keep this country going inspite of the 47% rat moochers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson