Not to sound cranky, but your comment is the 3rd of its type in regard to differing articles I have posted lately on abortion, eugneics and now euthanasia. In each, the poster is more concerned about money than the life and worth of an innocent and defenseless individual.
I am sorry that you feel it a burden to have to pay for others when they are incapable of no longer taking care of themselves. I hope you never need help and have to depend on the generosity of others when you get old. Or--I suppose you can move to the Netherlands.
Secondly, don't necessarily be too harsh on those who have been hardened by our ubermenschen societal planners.
If you've read C.S. Lewis' The Abolition of Man, you're aware that a good number of otherwise very good minds have had their hearts withered in situ by those claiming to promote open-mindedness.
As I see it, our best and maybe only chance to fight these megalomaniacs* is to revive the hearts of their intended victims. And, to do that, you've gotta alert those erstwhile victims to the fact that they have a heart and there are valient tasks, too long untended, awaiting of it.
Sheeple, once aware of their status, may not be that easily culled.
God, who turns water to wine, has imbued in sheeple what it takes to return them to full manhood.
This is, as I see it, the paramount reason that religion is under ever increasing attack today. The very concept of God, even without professed belief, but just making the attempt at an understanding of the concept of God leads to helping protect the weak and strong alike from this immense sin that is currently being implemented.
--------
*What you've posted here and elsewhere seems in agreement with my choice of that word.
What individuals should choose to do in supporting friends and family is one thing, what the State should coerce them to do to support strangers is an entirely different matter.