Population Policy Discussion

[Esternial]

Raise the pension age, lower the pension, legalize voluntary euthanasia and make it mandatory for seniors with serious health problems making them dependent on extra support.

"Mandatory euthanasia" for the elderly is a nice euphemism for genocide.

But I'm sure the social cost is worth it if people can save a few bucks.

The fancy term is "Senicide".

[Xirtam]

Abstinence Only sex education.

Even better, just let em' fuck like rabbits.

[Esternial]

"Mandatory euthanasia" for the elderly is a nice euphemism for genocide.

But I'm sure the social cost is worth it if people can save a few bucks.

I said voluntary euthanasia and reserve the mandatory for elderly people with serious health problems.

Which is still killing people without their consent.

[Othelos]

"Mandatory euthanasia" for the elderly is a nice euphemism for genocide.

But I'm sure the social cost is worth it if people can save a few bucks.

I said voluntary euthanasia and reserve the mandatory for elderly people with serious health problems.

That's pretty much going to end up being most of the elderly at one time or another. Few people pass away peacefully.

That also begs the question: what about young and middle aged people with serious health issues? Why would the government only force euthanasia on the elderly that are ill/disabled? I mean, enforced euthanasia for all the sick and handicapped is a great way for a cash-strapped society to save some money.

[Xirtam]

I said voluntary euthanasia and reserve the mandatory for elderly people with serious health problems.

Which is still killing people without their consent.

A lot of people with the kind of serious health problems I'm talking about are unable to consent.

[Othelos]

Which is still killing people without their consent.

A lot of people with the kind of serious health problems I'm talking about are unable to consent.

Not all though, apparently.

[Xirtam]

I said voluntary euthanasia and reserve the mandatory for elderly people with serious health problems.

That's pretty much going to end up being most of the elderly. Few people pass away peacefully.

That also begs the question: what about young and middle aged people with serious health issues? Why would the government only force euthanasia on the elderly that are ill/disabled? I mean, enforced euthanasia for all the sick and handicapped is a great way for a cash-strapped society to save some money.

A lot of younger people with health problems can recover or be treated without immediately running into another health problem or death.
EDIT: wanted to comment on another thing.

That's pretty much going to end up being most of the elderly. Few people pass away peacefully.

The way I see it a lot old people with dementia or alzheimer's or in a vegetative state occupying hospitals and rest homes drying up taxpayer money lack quality of life anyway.

[Death Metal]

Abstinence Only sex education.

Will only lead to more teenage pregnancies and STDs.

Abstinence is the worst answer.

[Xirtam]

A lot of people with the kind of serious health problems I'm talking about are unable to consent.

Not all though, apparently.

Maybe not.

[Othelos]

That's pretty much going to end up being most of the elderly. Few people pass away peacefully.

That also begs the question: what about young and middle aged people with serious health issues? Why would the government only force euthanasia on the elderly that are ill/disabled? I mean, enforced euthanasia for all the sick and handicapped is a great way for a cash-strapped society to save some money.

A lot of younger people with health problems can recover or be treated without immediately running into another health problem or death.

That doesn't answer the questions. The same can be said about many of the elderly.

There are plenty of old and young with 'serious health issues' and issues that 'require lots of help' that they can't recover from or change.

[Othelos]

Not all though, apparently.

Maybe not.

'A lot' is not all.

[Saiwania]

Will only lead to more teenage pregnancies and STDs. Abstinence is the worst answer.

Well yes, more pregnancies and potential births is the point for a country with a shrinking population like Japan, I never said that it was moral, only that it would achieve some population growth via unplanned pregnancies from teen mothers that don't decide to abort. This approach is utilitarian.

[Xirtam]

A lot of younger people with health problems can recover or be treated without immediately running into another health problem or death.

That doesn't answer the questions. The same can be said about many of the elderly.

There are plenty of old and young with 'serious health issues' and issues that 'require lots of help' that they can't recover from or change.

Well, I guess if no one else is willing to pay for their welfare/healthcare and the rest of it then off with their heads

[Othelos]

Will only lead to more teenage pregnancies and STDs. Abstinence is the worst answer.

Well yes, more pregnancies and potential births is the point for a country with a shrinking population like Japan, I never said that it was moral, only that it would achieve some population growth via unplanned pregnancies from teen mothers that don't decide to abort. This approach is utilitarian.

Why would you advocate something you consider immoral?

[Xirtam]

Maybe not.

'A lot' is not all.

Asides from people in a vegetative state, and people with alzheimer's and dementia I'd put people in constant pain or in need of constant life support on the list.

[Othelos]

That doesn't answer the questions. The same can be said about many of the elderly.

There are plenty of old and young with 'serious health issues' and issues that 'require lots of help' that they can't recover from or change.

Well, I guess if no one else is willing to pay for their welfare/healthcare and the rest of it then off with their heads

You don't find anything ethically or morally wrong with what you're advocating?

[Xirtam]

Well yes, more pregnancies and potential births is the point for a country with a shrinking population like Japan, I never said that it was moral, only that it would achieve some population growth via unplanned pregnancies from teen mothers that don't decide to abort. This approach is utilitarian.

Why would you advocate something you consider immoral?

Why make a distinction between what's practical and what's moral?

[Death Metal]

Will only lead to more teenage pregnancies and STDs. Abstinence is the worst answer.

Well yes, more pregnancies and potential births is the point for a country with a shrinking population like Japan, I never said that it was moral, only that it would achieve some population growth via unplanned pregnancies from teen mothers that don't decide to abort. This approach is utilitarian.

Then you should teach them just to fuck each other's brains out for MERICA and be done with it.

[Xirtam]

Well, I guess if no one else is willing to pay for their welfare/healthcare and the rest of it then off with their heads

You don't find anything ethically or morally wrong with what you're advocating?

Not really. If their life has to come at the cost of others, then there is much better things to be spending the money on.

[Xirtam]

Another solution would be to have plenty of maternity leave and pay people welfare for having dependents.

[Othelos]

'A lot' is not all.

Asides from people in a vegetative state, and people with alzheimer's and dementia I'd put people in constant pain or in need of constant life support on the list.

There are plenty of people who live a normal or nearly normal life, even if they are in constant pain.

Also, plenty of the people you mentioned are cared for by their family or some kind of worker payed for by the family. Why would you advocate for forced euthanasia for them?

[Othelos]

You don't find anything ethically or morally wrong with what you're advocating?

Not really. If their life has to come at the cost of others, then there is much better things to be spending the money on.

Money triumphs over humanity? I don't think you've considered all the social costs of what you are advocating.

Instead of euthanasia enforced by the state, you could just leave the decision up to the family. That's a much more humane way to cut costs.

[Saiwania]

Then you should teach them just to fuck each other's brains out for MERICA and be done with it.

No, you see; it is reverse psychology, you tell the children that sex is dirty and evil and not to do it, so that they will do it and the teenage women will get pregnant at prime reproductive age and odds are will give birth if Catholic/Mormon ideology is spread to the population at large. That is my prescription for Japan and other countries facing a demographic crisis. I guarantee that 20 years of this will result in enough of a baby boom that they could stop all of these measures because they'd be back to normal population size in just a generation.

[Xirtam]

Asides from people in a vegetative state, and people with alzheimer's and dementia I'd put people in constant pain or in need of constant life support on the list.

There are plenty of people who live a normal or nearly normal life, even if they are in constant pain.

Also, plenty of the people you mentioned are cared for by their family or some kind of worker payed for by the family. Why would you advocate for forced euthanasia for them?

The money they put into the care is money taken out of the economy.

[Xirtam]

Not really. If their life has to come at the cost of others, then there is much better things to be spending the money on.

Money triumphs over humanity? I don't think you've considered all the social costs of what you are advocating.

Instead of euthanasia enforced by the state, you could just leave the decision up to the family. That's a much more humane way to cut costs.

If you look at other needy people it really does go to say that life is cheaper than what these people afflicted by bad health are asking for.
In the 3rd world you can save lives for a dollar a day.
Life really is cheap.