Executing the old - future necessity or absurd notion

As I walk down the streets of China, in the ghetto areas, and on the back alleys I see old people who look empty as they walk slowwwwwly down the street.

I've engaged many in conversation and one complaint is that they are so lonely because their society and children don't care about them.

Secondly others talk about they just count the days till they die.

In the future will it be a necessity to take these old people off the street or is this utter nonsense.

When water supplies and diseases run wild it may be better to only cultivate a society of healthy citizens, is this thinking cruel and unusual and borderline nazi-like or is it something that could actually happen?

When populations reach over the means for the government and the land to support their needs, the obvious will come, either revolution or wars to keep the people' mind to away from their problems.

China is a time bomb ready to explode, and what it hurts the most is that it will be more than a few countries to be willing to help with the devastating that will come from it.

One of the big problems facing china also is diseases when an outbreak happens is of big proportions because is hard to keep people away from each other because is not where to go.

Very sad/

well you put it as a question, my view is that it an absurd notion

as far as... 'their society and children don't care about them'
that seems a judgement call, and a quality of life issue....
maybe those sorts would find some remedy in becoming a member of
The Hemlock Society as one avenue.

as far as... 'water supplies and diseases ....'
in the still unfolding Hurricane Katrina aftermath in New Orleans,
people still found a way to provide for their pets, even in the midst of their desparations.
i didn't see a triage mentality take root against the infirmed, disabled or the elderly or addled

i really hope that your internal realities aren't beset with those types of
sinister dystopias...... and demons

peace

Absurd notion. Never a need.

You are walking down streets in China where old people sit in the roadway, talking to you about their kids not caring about them?

Ok....well, isn't this a bit out of the blue?

I guess a little out of the blue. The though came from the 7000 abortions in China case. If China is willing to abort unborn life because of opverpopulation, will they ever execute the elderly for the same reason?

No my mind isn't twisted and I don't think that executing the elderly is a good thing, but is it possible it will be a necessity in the future?

Have pharmaceutical companies been lenghtening the average life span to the point where we are going to have too many old people and not enough young people and middle aged people to support them all. To conserve natural resources will we have to execute them?

Originally posted by St Udio
well you put it as a question, my view is that it an absurd notion


as far as... 'water supplies and diseases ....'
in the still unfolding Hurricane Katrina aftermath in New Orleans,
people still found a way to provide for their pets, even in the midst of their desparations.
i didn't see a triage mentality take root against the infirmed, disabled or the elderly or addled

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Actually, some pretty horrific things happened to the critically ill in New Orleans hospitals.

This idea may seem absurd now, but think about it. When there are fifteen billion people on the earth, and enough food, water, and shelter for maybe seven or eight billion, population reduction might not seem so terrible after all.

Humankind must eventually check its own growth. The Earth can only sustain so many people, and we are headed for a complete implosion of society at this rate... with the exponential birth rates of the past century, we're looking at another hundred or two hundred years, tops, before there are simply too many people left for any but a handful to obtain the necessities of life.

So do the world a favor, and euthanize your local old person! The mouth you feed may be your own.


[edit on 13-9-2005 by The Parallelogram]

Actually, some pretty horrific things happened to the critically ill in New Orleans hospitals.

This idea may seem absurd now, but think about it. When there are fifteen billion people on the earth, and enough food, water, and shelter for maybe seven or eight billion, population reduction might not seem so terrible after all.

Humankind must eventually check its own growth.

So do the world a favor, and euthanize your local old person! The mouth you feed may be your own.

It seems more logical to kill the old people who can't do anything and feel like they're dying anyways since it's probably just the pharmaceutical conspiracy to keep them alive the longest so they they can consume for a longer amount of time.

If everyone died before the age of 60, half the products created these days wouldn't exist.... That's just a figure of speech, I have no proof that half the products wouldn't exist. But just think about how much old people buy. They don't work but they buy.... bye bye

This is really a distestable notion. The desire to live is deeply ingrained in everyone of us, with perhaps the exception of the the suicidal. Even a drowning man will grasp at the blade of a sword in a futile attempt to survive.

This brings to mind that Michael York movie, "Logan's Run." It's based in a futuristic society that deems "old" people irrelavent, and by "old" I mean over 30, and executes them.

Besides, at what age would you consider a person to be old, or rather, too old? It comes down to a matter of perspective. Would you say, 55 when a person is termed a senior citizen, or perhaps 65 when they become eligible for social security benefits?

Since your premise also concerns overpopulation, why stop at the elderly? How about the invalid, mentally ill, homeless, improvished or perpetually unemployed?

There is absolutely no humanity if society seriously considers this scenario as a viable option to population control.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Inuits and Eskimos used to take the old out into the wild, and leave them there, once they hit a certain age.

This could be true for some other cultures as well.

Originally posted by 00PS
I guess a little out of the blue. The though came from the 7000 abortions in China case. If China is willing to abort unborn life because of opverpopulation, will they ever execute the elderly for the same reason?

They'll probably just deny them priority health care and the like and hope that they die sooner.

is it possible it will be a necessity in the future?

Necessity? No, there is plenty of food on earth and man has only begun to start modifing his foodsources to make them extrapotent, so no, not necessary, but its quite possible. Eugenics and population culls are fairly popular ideas.

not enough young people and middle aged people to support them all.

Yes, but thats a different matter perhaps. Retirement in the west is something like 65ish. If people are living to be 120 in great numbers, that'll have to be changed, to something like 100.

To conserve natural resources will we have to execute them?

Resources, no. The economy might be a different story, but then again, thats only if they are retireing and collecting social pensions.

just the pharmaceutical conspiracy to keep them alive the longest so they they can consume for a longer amount of time.

What the heck? The whole point of the pharmaceutical industry and all medecine is to keep people living longer, thats not a conspiracy, and if it were, lets all thank them for it!

nathraq
but I believe the Inuits and Eskimos used to take the old out into the wild, and leave them there, once they hit a certain age.

And other cultures used to take mentally handicapped or physically handicapped children out into the woods and leave them on a hill to be torn apart by wolves bears and maggots. Thankfully civilization has won out over such barbarism in most places. China has population size laws, they force, or at the very least really insist that people get sterilized and fetuses get aborted. It isn't too much of a leap to see them euthanizing people above a certain age.




But, again, they can probably accomplish this more subtly by refusing to 'expend' limited health care resources on them, etc etc. (tho I think that the chinese health care system is not at all as government run as it was in the 60's and such, so this might not be as feasable).
heck, they could allways do like North Korea does and simply arrest people and put them into camps and slowly starve them to death.