Are people living too long?

[rchawk]

My 79 year-old father says they are. He goes to the VA for regular doctor visits and a bunch of pills, but he admits that he should have died years ago, many of his generation as well.

Nothing against Dad, he wants to live. He takes the pills, has the occasional surgery. He is enjoying the football season.

But how many of our resources are being tied up by people who nature intended to die decades ago? Old people obviously. What about fat people? They go to the doctor, get their meds that keeps their hearts from stopping. Can't forget people who smoke all their lives and then use every dollar of the state and insurance company to stretch their lives out another six months.

Nothing against any of the above, we all have loved ones who fall into those categories. But they are expensive, take up resources and time and consume money. It seems like we are contravening nature. It is not how the earth was built. One more thing we are doing wrong.

 

[dgordo]

everyone is living too long except me.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

And so it starts.

I like the way you dodge personal responsibility for this gentle push to send the elderly to gas chambers. Blaming the thought on your elderly father is a nice touch and works much better. Sounds like an endorsement or permission from the affected group.

I definitely agree. If we let them die, just think how much money we could save. And how much more if we help them die.

Should easily be able to cover the GOP plans to reduce taxes on the rich.

Not only could we reduce taxes, but we would consume fewer resources and less energy. Perhaps we could dispense with climate change concerns that way, without affecting the economy or going out of our way.

And, let's not forget, we barely have enough workers now to cover the existing Social Security beneficiaries. Problem solved if we get rid of most recipients.

Who could object?

 

[SpartanHawk]

My 79 year-old father says they are. He goes to the VA for regular doctor visits and a bunch of pills, but he admits that he should have died years ago, many of his generation as well.

Nothing against Dad, he wants to live. He takes the pills, has the occasional surgery. He is enjoying the football season.

But how many of our resources are being tied up by people who nature intended to die decades ago? Old people obviously. What about fat people? They go to the doctor, get their meds that keeps their hearts from stopping. Can't forget people who smoke all their lives and then use every dollar of the state and insurance company to stretch their lives out another six months.

Nothing against any of the above, we all have loved ones who fall into those categories. But they are expensive, take up resources and time and consume money. It seems like we are contravening nature. It is not how the earth was built. One more thing we are doing wrong.

Actually if you are well off, your life expectancy is going up (when you have a better life style, eat better, and actually can get health care in this country), but not so much if at all if you're in the lower part of the economic ladder. And those suggesting us reduce our retirement age are in effect asking to SCREW those on lower incomes as they will be the ones to get less retirement pay from social security when they die sooner, And the wealthy who don't have to pay any more than someone making $116k with the payroll tax cap, in effect get more bang for their buck than anyone else not only from the percentage of money they put in to social security, but what they get back from it after they retire since they tend to live longer too.

How Raising the Retirement Age Screws the Working Poor

 

[rchawk]

Geez, I don't want to gas or euthanize anybody. Not my Dad, not yours, not some crusty old fart in Topeka.

I;m just saying that we have gone beyond what nature intended on planet Earth. The brontosauruses and the triceratops were here long ago and thrived, the saber-toothed tiger later. All were animals who lived and died and the earth kept going.

Primates got smarter and here we are, messing up the earth's natural pattern. Credit our brains for wiping out species, polluting the oceans, and yes we live longer than we are supposed to. A dubious honor for the animal that is screwing up the earth. We have gone too far and away from nature, and I think that will be our downfall.

 

[LuteHawk]

God is the author of life, He is the one who gives us breath
each day. God is the one who decides what day we are
born and what day we will die. The Christian places their
destiny in His hands

 

[Run&Blade]

In time technology will make healthcare dirt cheap. I truly believe it.

Machines will do full body scans have access to digital records. It will be the final area of great economic competition.

 

[Wendy79]

There's a difference between a patient who takes a few pills but is overall relatively healthy and a patient who is barely conscious, unable to care for themselves, and is basically being kept alive by artificial means. A significant portion of the medical bills come at the end of life for critical care - the life support, the unnecessary tests. And I can't blame the patient or especially the families.

 

[SpartanHawk]

There's a difference between a patient who takes a few pills but is overall relatively healthy and a patient who is barely conscious, unable to care for themselves, and is basically being kept alive by artificial means. A significant portion of the medical bills come at the end of life for critical care - the life support, the unnecessary tests. And I can't blame the patient or especially the families.

Which is why more states need laws like we have in Oregon, that lets those in those conditions make that time come earlier, if the conditions are such that they are at a terminal stage, and they feel that they can't deal with the pain and problems any more too.

 

[LuteHawk]

Wendy, there are many people who have a "Living Will".
It will usually stipulate the person who signed it, does
not want to be kept alive by any artificial means such
as a ventilator. The person is not actually living, but
the ventilator is mechanically helping them survive.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

How about this. It will solve the SS problem and also deal with Spartan's pesky facts.

Once someone is fully vested in Social Security, they can start collecting any time they want. But the clock starts. Ten years later they have to off themselves or report to a euthanasia center. Failure to do one or the other is obviously a capital offense leading to summary execution.

People who never collect, never start the clock. They can live as long as they are able to live without drawing on SS (or Medicare and the other safety net features). So . . . they can be a burden on society for up to 10 years and then go away, or they can stick around as long as they want as long as they aren't a burden on society.

Obviously the choice of a 10 year clock is just spit-balling. We could go shorter if needed.

 

[Wendy79]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/whitneyjefferson/the-31-most-iconic-eye-rolls-of-all-time#.lkZwANK1D

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

In time technology will make healthcare dirt cheap. I truly believe it.

Machines will do full body scans have access to digital records. It will be the final area of great economic competition.

And even sooner if we are willing to prioritize it and invest in it.

Unfortunately, if the choice is dramatic improvements in health care or tax cuts, we already know the answer.

 

[who r u]

There's a difference between a patient who takes a few pills but is overall relatively healthy and a patient who is barely conscious, unable to care for themselves, and is basically being kept alive by artificial means. A significant portion of the medical bills come at the end of life for critical care - the life support, the unnecessary tests. And I can't blame the patient or especially the families.

i agree with this. i recently had a grandparent that was 80 + that passed away, they had a dnr signed and had doctors that wanted to do surgeries but they were not healthy enough to survive. they spent a week or two in the hospital before being taken of all supporting machines and passed away shortly after. they didnt want to be in the hospital at all, they wanted to be at their home, even though that they hadnt lived at for at least 6 months because they werent able to live alone. i also had an uncle who recently passed away that had chosen to go at home surrounded by his family. i had another uncle that recently passed suddenly from heart attack and his bill from hospital was above $50,000 for less than 24hrs.

 

[IMCC965]

And so it starts.

I like the way you dodge personal responsibility for this gentle push to send the elderly to gas chambers. Blaming the thought on your elderly father is a nice touch and works much better. Sounds like an endorsement or permission from the affected group.

I definitely agree. If we let them die, just think how much money we could save. And how much more if we help them die.

Should easily be able to cover the GOP plans to reduce taxes on the rich.

Not only could we reduce taxes, but we would consume fewer resources and less energy. Perhaps we could dispense with climate change concerns that way, without affecting the economy or going out of our way.

And, let's not forget, we barely have enough workers now to cover the existing Social Security beneficiaries. Problem solved if we get rid of most recipients.

Who could object?

Funny you should feel this way since you are a huge supporter of Obamacare authored by J. Gruber.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Funny you should feel this way since you are a huge supporter of Obamacare authored by J. Gruber.

I trust most people know I'm not serious. The problem I have is that the argument can be made and will be made - and for some of the reasons I gave - but it will be sold more gently than that. It will start with a subtle campaign to devalue old people. Because it's important that we believe they don't deserve any better treatment. Humans are good at devaluing other people, so that isn't much of an impediment.

 

[HallofFame]

Don't worry about me guys. I'm a big fat lardo who will be happy to check out at 50.

 

[IMCC965]

I trust most people know I'm not serious. The problem I have is that the argument can be made and will be made - and for some of the reasons I gave - but it will be sold more gently than that. It will start with a subtle campaign to devalue old people. Because it's important that we believe they don't deserve any better treatment. Humans are good at devaluing other people, so that isn't much of an impediment.

Well good. Let's start with Jimmy Carter. Obamacare and J. Gruber will be proud.

 

[markfromj]

Nature doesn't have intentions.

 

[who r u]

Don't worry about me guys. I'm a big fat lardo who will be happy to check out at 50.

no offence to you hof but i almost used your pic in the sab pitt thread on the football board. i didnt do it because i didnt have your permission, and i like you, so i didnt want to upset you. if you are ok with me or anyone else using your pic in the sab football board thread then i will use your pic as inspiration but if not i also understand and i wont do it.

i thank you for your response.

 

[naturalmwa]

Are we swapping positions? I thought Ds were supposed to be for death panels and Rs were against them? Let me know.

 

[HallofFame]

no offence to you hof but i almost used your pic in the sab pitt thread on the football board. i didnt do it because i didnt have your permission, and i like you, so i didnt want to upset you. if you are ok with me or anyone else using your pic in the sab football board thread then i will use your pic as inspiration but if not i also understand and i wont do it.

i thank you for your response.

I would be honored.

 

[TexMichFan]

I want to live as long as I can recognize this as a silly question.

If you have quality of life as defined by yourself then you should enjoy it for as long as possible. When I lose the ability to know I hate Ohio State it is time to go.

 

[ping72]

Everyone is given 5 years to enjoy their retirement and then are "escorted" to the next stage of their existence.

 

[Lone Clone]

My 79 year-old father says they are. He goes to the VA for regular doctor visits and a bunch of pills, but he admits that he should have died years ago, many of his generation as well.

Nothing against Dad, he wants to live. He takes the pills, has the occasional surgery. He is enjoying the football season.

But how many of our resources are being tied up by people who nature intended to die decades ago? Old people obviously. What about fat people? They go to the doctor, get their meds that keeps their hearts from stopping. Can't forget people who smoke all their lives and then use every dollar of the state and insurance company to stretch their lives out another six months.

Nothing against any of the above, we all have loved ones who fall into those categories. But they are expensive, take up resources and time and consume money. It seems like we are contravening nature. It is not how the earth was built. One more thing we are doing wrong.

Mrs. LC and I are not. I can't speak for anyone else.

 

[naturalmwa]

Everyone is given 5 years to enjoy their retirement and then are "escorted" to the next stage of their existence.

Star Trek had an episode where they did this. It led to the destruction of their planet. Old people are a resource too.

 

[Lone Clone]

God is the author of life, He is the one who gives us breath
each day. God is the one who decides what day we are
born and what day we will die. The Christian places their
destiny in His hands

Ah, yes. Which raised the classic Catch-22. What if God decides it's your time, but your relatives insist on defying Him by putting you on life support? Your ascent to Heaven is delayed; God is pissed off (to the extent He gets pissed off); and your relatives get a check mark on the "debit" side of the ledger from St. Peter.

Put it another way: If God decides it's your time to die, you gonna die. Period. The end -- and I mean that literally. If you tell the doctors to pull the plug, you're doing God's will.

 

[SpartanHawk]

Star Trek had an episode where they did this. It led to the destruction of their planet. Old people are a resource too.

Pretty soon this will be looked on as a documentary then rather than scifi speculation... I guess Farrah Fawcett didn't hold on as much to her longevity to be more with the spirit of this movie...

 

[linkshero]

I would actually argue longer life spans, and lower, more controlled reproduction would actually advance the human race. But the left will see that as elitist, so fire away.

I honestly think if we can improve the world economy before its destruction, that complete death as we know it will become essentially obsolete. We will have the ability to download our brain activity into a new 'vessel', as ours nears the end of it's lifespan. How long it could potentially extend a person's existence, and what that means in terms of ones mind and soul is hard to anticipate. But I feel like we may only be a few generations away from people looking back and wondering why we let people just pass.

 

[Wendy79]

I would actually argue longer life spans, and lower, more controlled reproduction would actually advance the human race. But the left will see that as elitist, so fire away.

I honestly think if we can improve the world economy before its destruction, that complete death as we know it will become essentially obsolete. We will have the ability to download our brain activity into a new 'vessel', as ours nears the end of it's lifespan. How long it could potentially extend a person's existence, and what that means in terms of ones mind and soul is hard to anticipate. But I feel like we may only be a few generations away from people looking back and wondering why we let people just pass.

Read "The Footprints of God" by Greg Iles. Dan Brown-esque, but it has some good/interesting ideas.

 

[Titanhawk2]

My 79 year-old father says they are. He goes to the VA for regular doctor visits and a bunch of pills, but he admits that he should have died years ago, many of his generation as well.

Nothing against Dad, he wants to live. He takes the pills, has the occasional surgery. He is enjoying the football season.

But how many of our resources are being tied up by people who nature intended to die decades ago? Old people obviously. What about fat people? They go to the doctor, get their meds that keeps their hearts from stopping. Can't forget people who smoke all their lives and then use every dollar of the state and insurance company to stretch their lives out another six months.

Nothing against any of the above, we all have loved ones who fall into those categories. But they are expensive, take up resources and time and consume money. It seems like we are contravening nature. It is not how the earth was built. One more thing we are doing wrong.

People have always lived this long. The difference is almost everybody today makes it into adulthood whereas 100 years ago, half of your kids died young.

On the flip side, I see plenty of 50 and 60 year olds in the obits every day.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

I trust most people know I'm not serious. The problem I have is that the argument can be made and will be made - and for some of the reasons I gave - but it will be sold more gently than that. It will start with a subtle campaign to devalue old people. Because it's important that we believe they don't deserve any better treatment. Humans are good at devaluing other people, so that isn't much of an impediment.

This paragraph sounds so much like me I'm wondering if I somehow hacked your account and typed it for you and then knocked my head and forgot about it or something.

This is my view with end of life care. (The person who's dying or if they can't their close family has to make the call to stop treatments. We can't make that call for other people.)

This is my view with providing healthcare and food to everyone.

This is my view with drone bombings

This is my view with abortion.

And this is in a sense my view with the death penalty. If I actually thought the DP prevented violence or crime I'd be all for it. . . but it doesn't and the only defense for it I ever see offered up is some sadistic sense of revenge.

 

[SpartanHawk]

I want to live as long as I can recognize this as a silly question.

If you have quality of life as defined by yourself then you should enjoy it for as long as possible. When I lose the ability to know I hate Ohio State it is time to go.

I won't lose that. I still have my old "OHOWIHATE OHIO STATE" t-shirt I got from Spartan land back during my high school days in the 70's.... I'll hold on to it for the rest of my days to keep me living long!

 

[naturalmwa]

I would actually argue longer life spans, and lower, more controlled reproduction would actually advance the human race. But the left will see that as elitist, so fire away.

I honestly think if we can improve the world economy before its destruction, that complete death as we know it will become essentially obsolete. We will have the ability to download our brain activity into a new 'vessel', as ours nears the end of it's lifespan. How long it could potentially extend a person's existence, and what that means in terms of ones mind and soul is hard to anticipate. But I feel like we may only be a few generations away from people looking back and wondering why we let people just pass.

If you think the opposition to your plan would come from the left, you haven't been paying attention to the political landscape. This may be yet another example of people who "feel" conservative all the while thinking like a liberal.

 

[SpartanHawk]

If you think the opposition to your plan would come from the left, you haven't been paying attention to the political landscape. This may be yet another example of people who "feel" conservative all the while thinking like a liberal.

I agree that rather than limiting life spans, we should find ways of encouraging birth control and other healthy means to reduce our population growth. There's a good reason to have liberal views on decreasing the wealth gap imbalance in the world, as especially those in third world countries could have a huge reduced birth rate if we were to help reduce the imbalance of wealth in those countries where many have tons of kids to make sure that "some" of them survive the conditions of their poverty to provide them sanctuary/security as descendants when they grow old. The sooner we can reduce population growth, and perhaps even have it negative for a while so that we as a species don't cannibalize our earth's resources, then there will be less pressure for those living longer. I don't think I'd want a world though where people live twice as long as they live now or longer though. I think that even population growth might be harder to contain with that many people living longer, and even if we would reduce births to compensate if that were to happen, we'd have less diversity with fewer people living over a certain time segment that would give us less minds to grow our technology prowess, etc. to meet the challenges of the future.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

People have always lived this long. The difference is almost everybody today makes it into adulthood whereas 100 years ago, half of your kids died young.

On the flip side, I see plenty of 50 and 60 year olds in the obits every day.

That is exactly what's driving our population growth. Freaking vaccines. . . Not causing autism, but making our population grow.

For the record I'm not all that worried about population growth. We have more then enough food to feed everyone and could feed a lot more people in fact. It's the fact it's not being well distributed and certain places lack the internal security to make this possible.

That's what we need to work on. . . don't have a problem with pre-conception birth control options but it's not a problem of people having too many kids or population itself.

 

[linkshero]

If you think the opposition to your plan would come from the left, you haven't been paying attention to the political landscape. This may be yet another example of people who "feel" conservative all the while thinking like a liberal.

I have never denied having liberal beliefs when it comes to some issues, especially in the social category. But the whole jump to diversity always seems to be initiated by the left, and no offense Spartan, but I actually agree with your post. There is a slight risk to diversity, but I would argue many of these 'sub cultures' that people are concerned about when it comes to a potential drop in birth rates, would actually flourish because their populations wouldn't be under so much stress.

 

[linkshero]

People have always lived this long. The difference is almost everybody today makes it into adulthood whereas 100 years ago, half of your kids died young.

On the flip side, I see plenty of 50 and 60 year olds in the obits every day.

I think there may have been some people that made it past 70 100 years ago, but I would bet it was mostly female, and the percentages among both genders were much smaller. I would also bet that 100 years ago, any male over 70 was from a much higher social economic standing. No question that 'advantage' still exists today, but I would bet the percentage of lower income seniors is much, much higher than 100 years ago.

 

[SpartanHawk]

That is exactly what's driving our population growth. Freaking vaccines. . . Not causing autism, but making our population grow.

For the record I'm not all that worried about population growth. We have more then enough food to feed everyone and could feed a lot more people in fact. It's the fact it's not being well distributed and certain places lack the internal security to make this possible.

That's what we need to work on. . . don't have a problem with pre-conception birth control options but it's not a problem of people having too many kids or population itself.

We are growing our population at a way higher rate now than nature had intended us to be having to fit in with the natural environment of our world. We may actually be able to engineer more food to feed us, but that isn't universally available, and right now there's a bigger problem with just access to water in many parts of the world, especially with problems associated with climate change melting off glaciers that are a source for many water supplies people depend on not only for their own consumption but for raising food, and for the wild life around them. More people also means more resource consumption of not just food resources and more carbon, etc. that contributes to climate change damage.

It is often noted that if we can increase access to education especially to women (as well as some degree of reasonable wealth to the poor in so many parts of the world), that our population growth that is growing a lot in these areas would be reduced quite a bit. And those people would live longer and be more valuable parts of society too.

 

[naturalmwa]

I have never denied having liberal beliefs when it comes to some issues, especially in the social category. But the whole jump to diversity always seems to be initiated by the left, and no offense Spartan, but I actually agree with your post. There is a slight risk to diversity, but I would argue many of these 'sub cultures' that people are concerned about when it comes to a potential drop in birth rates, would actually flourish because their populations wouldn't be under so much stress.

I missed the diversity subtext to your post. I read that you wanted to curtail birth rates, a position the left already supports in opposition to the right. I read that you wanted to eventually download people into computers, a move that is also sure to anger the religious minded on the right. So I have no doubt that your plan would face opposition, but I question the logic of assuming it would come from the left. The only think the left might insist on is that room on the hard drive be reserved for a diverse representative sample of humanity and that we subsidize the download process.