3 ms·
I love how we are now seeing suggestions to just skip the whole communism part and go straight to almost mass-murder "to keep society stable", and claim that su
by candiodari 5y ago
I love how we are now seeing suggestions to just skip the whole communism part and go straight to almost mass-murder "to keep society stable", and claim that such is reasonable to make life easier for young people. So while we're not doing communism, we're still using the same reason and central decision making to do the mass-murder bit.
If you want to see real "medical waste", by the way, you should see how much is spent on a 2 year old that gets diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. Or, up until 10 years ago, a kid born with HIV. Now THAT is wasting money. In their case, the kid has never worked, will need MUCH more (essentially constant) medical attention for 30 years, expensive medicines for all that time, the treatment will fail, it's just a matter of when, and they still won't ever be able to contribute to society. By the time they're of working age they'll be so disabled they can't work (ok maybe the HIV baby could work for 10 years, tops). It's not reasonable to even have them type on a keyboard after maybe 14 years of age.
Let's kill em all! (especially now with mRNA vaccines we're pretty close to a cure) ...
- lotsofpulp 5y agoHow is giving someone the option of dying peacefully, as I suggested, equivalent to mass murder? Do you think societies have unlimited resources to spend on everyone? Should they be directed only to people with healthcare problems? What about people that suffer non healthcare tragedies? Not spending $2M of resources to keep a baby alive that has a 99% chance of not having any quality of life is not “killing people”.