I would go along with that.
Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully
I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
Magica said
Mar 29 5:21 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
I would go along with that. Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
Who's Aunt Fanny? I'd have died early with a name like that
Syl said
Mar 29 5:30 PM, 2025
Magica wrote:
Syl wrote:
I would go along with that. Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
Who's Aunt Fanny? I'd have died early with a name like that
I don't know who Aunt Fanny is either, but I'm sure someone has one somewhere.
Anonymous said
Mar 29 5:48 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
The population of over 90's in the UK is at an all-time high....and the men are at fault.
For some reason, more men are now living beyond 90 and catching up with the women. Maybe we have looked after them too well.
Bloody typical, we can't have anything for ourselves.
Magica said
Mar 29 5:58 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
Magica wrote:
Syl wrote:
I would go along with that. Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
Who's Aunt Fanny? I'd have died early with a name like that
I don't know who Aunt Fanny is either, but I'm sure someone has one somewhere.
Poor woman
Maddog said
Mar 29 10:23 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
I would go along with that. Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
The problem Canadians had was the doctors trying to get rid of Aunt Fanny, not the family..
Syl said
Mar 30 12:03 AM, 2025
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I would go along with that. Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
The problem Canadians had was the doctors trying to get rid of Aunt Fanny, not the family..
So what was in it for them?
They don't pay for the drugs and treatment older people may need.
Maddog said
Mar 30 2:40 AM, 2025
Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I would go along with that. Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
The problem Canadians had was the doctors trying to get rid of Aunt Fanny, not the family..
So what was in it for them?
They don't pay for the drugs and treatment older people may need.
Less of a drain on society I guess. They have since modified their procedures after people got upset..
Syl said
Mar 30 11:49 AM, 2025
Hmmm....Medics are supposed to save lives, not interfere with economics.
Barksdale said
Mar 30 11:59 AM, 2025
Maddog wrote:
It's probably going to get worse. The UK is aging and the elderly are the biggest strain on social services, especially healthcare..
There aren't enough worker bees to pay into the system. Immigrants can plug some of the holes, but the UK doesn't seem to be trying to attract what they need, and instead allow for more problems to be imported..
It's all sort of a problematic ponzi scheme..On one hand their are only so many resources for so many people..On the other hand, you need an ever-expanding pool of workers to keep pace with the ever-expanding pool of non workers.
I think most western countries are going to have to start means testing for benefits that you get at a certain age..
I just don't know if any elected government can withstand the pushback they will receive from older crowd. It's called the 3rd rail of politics over here for a reason .
Yes, you are right that it will probably get worse and I cannot see an end in sight. I can't remember a time when I have been so pessimistic at the UK economy and we can't kick the can down the road because we are reaching the end of the road!
I think I mentioned on here before that I am not counting on receiving the state pension (even if I make it to retirement age...) It would be a nice bonus, but that's how I'm treating it - as a bonus.
The Labour government have targeted benefits first because that is the easier sell to the public in comparison to pensions. However, pension cuts are coming followed by the sacred cow of UK politics - the NHS. I cannot ever see the NHS being scrapped but the services it offers will be reduced and more people will budget for private healthcare.
Maddog said
Mar 30 3:40 PM, 2025
Barksdale wrote:
Maddog wrote:
It's probably going to get worse. The UK is aging and the elderly are the biggest strain on social services, especially healthcare..
There aren't enough worker bees to pay into the system. Immigrants can plug some of the holes, but the UK doesn't seem to be trying to attract what they need, and instead allow for more problems to be imported..
It's all sort of a problematic ponzi scheme..On one hand their are only so many resources for so many people..On the other hand, you need an ever-expanding pool of workers to keep pace with the ever-expanding pool of non workers.
I think most western countries are going to have to start means testing for benefits that you get at a certain age..
I just don't know if any elected government can withstand the pushback they will receive from older crowd. It's called the 3rd rail of politics over here for a reason .
Yes, you are right that it will probably get worse and I cannot see an end in sight. I can't remember a time when I have been so pessimistic at the UK economy and we can't kick the can down the road because we are reaching the end of the road!
I think I mentioned on here before that I am not counting on receiving the state pension (even if I make it to retirement age...) It would be a nice bonus, but that's how I'm treating it - as a bonus.
The Labour government have targeted benefits first because that is the easier sell to the public in comparison to pensions. However, pension cuts are coming followed by the sacred cow of UK politics - the NHS. I cannot ever see the NHS being scrapped but the services it offers will be reduced and more people will budget for private healthcare.
All while trying to boost military spending. 🤷
Digger said
Mar 30 7:14 PM, 2025
Maddog wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
Magica wrote:
Syl wrote:
It's one form of culling, I suppose.
Yes, the pensioners and disabled. Who next?
Probably some cuts to pension allowances, other forms of benefits and non-essential NHS programmes.
Welcome to Austerity 2.0.
Once again ordinary families carry the can for the rich who will no doubt get a bail out in the economic downturn,
It's probably going to get worse. The UK is aging and the elderly are the biggest strain on social services, especially healthcare..
There aren't enough worker bees to pay into the system. Immigrants can plug some of the holes, but the UK doesn't seem to be trying to attract what they need, and instead allow for more problems to be imported..
It's all sort of a problematic ponzi scheme..On one hand their are only so many resources for so many people..On the other hand, you need an ever-expanding pool of workers to keep pace with the ever-expanding pool of non workers.
I think most western countries are going to have to start means testing for benefits that you get at a certain age..
I just don't know if any elected government can withstand the pushback they will receive from older crowd. It's called the 3rd rail of politics over here for a reason .
We have a lot of lazy feckless scroungers in this country along with a whole generation who don't want to work a 9 to 5 type job or do any kind of physical graft. We've enabled too many in believing minor ailments are massive disabilities, and given in to mass migration that if left unchecked will leave everyone floundering. We're a fucking mess, is what we are.
Anonymous said
Mar 30 8:58 PM, 2025
People have lost empathy and can't appreciate what its like to be in someone else's shoes hence the political move to the right in many countries. People only care about themselves. Twenty years ago people would have protested, rioted even against cuts to welfare for the elderly. Now no body cares, they are useless scroungers anyway right? next as Barksdale suggested, the establishment will try to make the poor and old expire b4 their time. A drain on resources surely. The rich and middle class will look the other way. but everyone gets old, if they get the chance to. So soon they will be expendable. This Orwellian future doesn't have 2b inevitable but we have to see who the real enemies are. Those in power, pulling the strings whose greed knows no bounds. Not the black man, the foreign man or the poor.
Maddog said
Mar 30 8:59 PM, 2025
Digger wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
Magica wrote:
Syl wrote:
It's one form of culling, I suppose.
Yes, the pensioners and disabled. Who next?
Probably some cuts to pension allowances, other forms of benefits and non-essential NHS programmes.
Welcome to Austerity 2.0.
Once again ordinary families carry the can for the rich who will no doubt get a bail out in the economic downturn,
It's probably going to get worse. The UK is aging and the elderly are the biggest strain on social services, especially healthcare..
There aren't enough worker bees to pay into the system. Immigrants can plug some of the holes, but the UK doesn't seem to be trying to attract what they need, and instead allow for more problems to be imported..
It's all sort of a problematic ponzi scheme..On one hand their are only so many resources for so many people..On the other hand, you need an ever-expanding pool of workers to keep pace with the ever-expanding pool of non workers.
I think most western countries are going to have to start means testing for benefits that you get at a certain age..
I just don't know if any elected government can withstand the pushback they will receive from older crowd. It's called the 3rd rail of politics over here for a reason .
We have a lot of lazy feckless scroungers in this country along with a whole generation who don't want to work a 9 to 5 type job or do any kind of physical graft. We've enabled too many in believing minor ailments are massive disabilities, and given in to mass migration that if left unchecked will leave everyone floundering. We're a fucking mess, is what we are.
All that might be true, but the system can't handle an ever aging population trying to be supported by a decreasing number of workers.
You need more workers, or you need fewer old people tapping into the system. That can be done through means testing or raising the age that benefits start..
Anonymous said
Mar 30 9:07 PM, 2025
What 'minor ailments' are now perceived as serious disabilities? Am honestly curious
Red Okktober said
Mar 31 11:18 AM, 2025
100 years ago the average life expectancy in the UK was 60 for women and 56 for men. The good thing with that is that most missed out on ailments that affect the elderly - dementia, lack of mobility etc. I don't see the point of extending lives through medicine just so a person can shit the bed and have carers wash and dress them. The quaility of life nose dives for those 90 year olds who make it that far. You do get exceptions - I once saw an old boy in his 90's run the London Marathon, and you sometimes see a 'sprightly' old dear who is in good health. But for most, it's not like that.
A cure for cancer or heart disease has been the Holy Grail of medicine for as long as I can remember, but those two things are common causes of death, and removing them in the future will cause more problems that they solve. I think an age limit should come with such wonder drugs - like a woman in her 30s with breast cancer or a child with leukemia would be fine, but curing an 80 year old of cancer wouldn't be.
Very few want to die or see loved ones die if their lives can be prolonged, and it is a case by case basis, but I would be in favour of fewer wonder cures for the very old. Imagine if 100 years from now the average age goes up to 120 - what quaility of life can they expect?
Red Okktober said
Mar 31 11:24 AM, 2025
Anonymous wrote:
What 'minor ailments' are now perceived as serious disabilities? Am honestly curious
Not even ailments, but part of being a human means you will get anxious at times, forget things, be late, be disorganised, get stressed out etc.
Now these things are being given names - ADHD for example, and docs are signing people off work for just being a human being.
Syl said
Mar 31 11:52 AM, 2025
Red Okktober wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
What 'minor ailments' are now perceived as serious disabilities? Am honestly curious
Not even ailments, but part of being a human means you will get anxious at times, forget things, be late, be disorganised, get stressed out etc.
Now these things are being given names - ADHD for example, and docs are signing people off work for just being a human being.
Apparently, if a person tells a medic they are having 'suicidal thoughts', it does wonders for their benefit claims....who wants to employ a person with severe mental illness?
And it's a lot easier to get away with than a physical illness.
Anonymous said
Mar 31 1:21 PM, 2025
It makes me so angry that the workshy pretend to be mentally ill to receive benefits because being truly mentally ill and suicidal is a horrible and very real torment that engulfs the lives of not only the suicidal person but their loved ones. Gen Z are increasingly receiving welfare for mental issues and it's this generation Labour claim to be targeting "for their own good". Sadly I do agree some of these youngsters could work despite claiming otherwise. Some may be very genuinely very anxious but others just don't want to bother working. However I do think right wing tabloids attempt successfully to demonise benefit claimants and there are more genuine mentally ill claimants than people think. Doctors are not stupid and the affect of clinical schizophrenia and other serious mental health concerns are not easily faked.
You need to import some Canadian ideas..
Obviously, the one who was agreeing to be euthanised would have to be vetted very carefully
I wouldn't like to see Aunty Fanny got rid of prematurely because she has gone a bit loopy, and the family want to get their hands on her silver.
Who's Aunt Fanny?
I'd have died early with a name like that 
I don't know who Aunt Fanny is either, but I'm sure someone has one somewhere.
Bloody typical, we can't have anything for ourselves.
Poor woman
The problem Canadians had was the doctors trying to get rid of Aunt Fanny, not the family..
So what was in it for them?
They don't pay for the drugs and treatment older people may need.
Less of a drain on society I guess. They have since modified their procedures after people got upset..
Yes, you are right that it will probably get worse and I cannot see an end in sight. I can't remember a time when I have been so pessimistic at the UK economy and we can't kick the can down the road because we are reaching the end of the road!
I think I mentioned on here before that I am not counting on receiving the state pension (even if I make it to retirement age...) It would be a nice bonus, but that's how I'm treating it - as a bonus.
The Labour government have targeted benefits first because that is the easier sell to the public in comparison to pensions. However, pension cuts are coming followed by the sacred cow of UK politics - the NHS. I cannot ever see the NHS being scrapped but the services it offers will be reduced and more people will budget for private healthcare.
All while trying to boost military spending. 🤷
We have a lot of lazy feckless scroungers in this country along with a whole generation who don't want to work a 9 to 5 type job or do any kind of physical graft. We've enabled too many in believing minor ailments are massive disabilities, and given in to mass migration that if left unchecked will leave everyone floundering. We're a fucking mess, is what we are.
All that might be true, but the system can't handle an ever aging population trying to be supported by a decreasing number of workers.
You need more workers, or you need fewer old people tapping into the system. That can be done through means testing or raising the age that benefits start..
A cure for cancer or heart disease has been the Holy Grail of medicine for as long as I can remember, but those two things are common causes of death, and removing them in the future will cause more problems that they solve. I think an age limit should come with such wonder drugs - like a woman in her 30s with breast cancer or a child with leukemia would be fine, but curing an 80 year old of cancer wouldn't be.
Very few want to die or see loved ones die if their lives can be prolonged, and it is a case by case basis, but I would be in favour of fewer wonder cures for the very old. Imagine if 100 years from now the average age goes up to 120 - what quaility of life can they expect?
Not even ailments, but part of being a human means you will get anxious at times, forget things, be late, be disorganised, get stressed out etc.
Now these things are being given names - ADHD for example, and docs are signing people off work for just being a human being.
Apparently, if a person tells a medic they are having 'suicidal thoughts', it does wonders for their benefit claims....who wants to employ a person with severe mental illness?
And it's a lot easier to get away with than a physical illness.