I believe a contributing factor will be the person's, in this case your father's, quality of life. Some people are quite vibrant, alert and happy at 90 and over. There are others who's quality of life is not so good. My siblings and I face that choice with a mother with alzheimers. We recently had to discuss whether, under certain circumstances whether to prolong her life with a feeding tube. We may not call them death panels, but these type of decisions are happening as we speak, but currently not by a 3rd party, but by family....at least hopefully anyway.

 

That is right. Every day families make those decisions based on a variety of factors but in general for the elderly economics isn't one of them. Eventually, economics will have to become a factor. I may not like that, Krugman may not like that, but pointing it out allows time to discuss the ethical dilemmas posed by advances in technology.

That is right. Every day families make those decisions based on a variety of factors but in general for the elderly economics isn't one of them. Eventually, economics will have to become a factor. I may not like that, Krugman may not like that, but pointing it out allows time to discuss the ethical dilemmas posed by advances in technology.

That's right...families are making the decisions...not the government.

Does your economics degree consider factors such as the AMA depressing the number of available doctors, or the fact that innovation might be depressed because of Big Pharma spending all its money promoting stiffeners and other vanity drugs rather than solving real problems?

 

The one thing you can do as a government that supports free market competition is break up monopolies or oligopolies, which the AMA could clearly fall under. Big Pharma is spending money promoting these drugs because they are filling a huge demand for these drugs.

That's right...families are making the decisions...not the government.

 

The problem is that for the elderly, the government is paying the bill. As our ability to extend life with very expensive treatment increases, it will very soon surpass our ability to pay for it. We will have two choices. We can tax the working people to pay or we can place limits on what the government will pay for in order to allocate the resources. Note that there is nothing in limiting what the government will pay that stops an individual from paying. There is this notion out there, fueled by people like Sarah Palin that are either too stupid to know what they are talking about or more likely using the lie for political purposes, that somehow the government is taking over medical decisions. The reality is that the government has a far smaller say in the type of treatment paid for than private health insurers do.

The problem is that for the elderly, the government is paying the bill. As our ability to extend life with very expensive treatment increases, it will very soon surpass our ability to pay for it. We will have two choices. We can tax the working people to pay or we can place limits on what the government will pay for in order to allocate the resources. Note that there is nothing in limiting what the government will pay that stops an individual from paying. There is this notion out there, fueled by people like Sarah Palin that are either too stupid to know what they are talking about or more likely using the lie for political purposes, that somehow the government is taking over medical decisions. The reality is that the government has a far smaller say in the type of treatment paid for than private health insurers do.

What we need is to have real health care reform, instead we got Obama Care. This is what happens when an administration rams something through just so they can tell you they accomplished something when in reality they accomplished nothing. I've said all along Obama Care doesn't address the problems, no one seems to care.

First there is no ethical dilemma, the government should not be in the business of what law abiding citizen lives or dies. It is not in their power nor should it be. Secondly the government isn't paying anything the government has no money. All money spent by the government is that of the people. The government is the inefficient middle man dispersing the peoples money. I doubt the people want the government deciding who will live or die. It's laughable to even think the government has a right to raise this question.

What we need is to have real health care reform, instead we got Obama Care. This is what happens when an administration rams something through just so they can tell you they accomplished something when in reality they accomplished nothing. I've said all along Obama Care doesn't address the problems, no one seems to care.

 

I think that there were a whole lot of us who said this but we were told your side lost deal with it. Nasty Nancy admitted that she didn't know what was in the bill. I keep hearing absolute nightmare scenarios about what the AFFORDABLE Care Act is going to do to premiums while those on the left just ignore it or throw platitudes at us about how we're doing our part to help those poor people (like young adults who need to get out of their parents basements) have coverage when they may or may not even want it. Mandy Connell asked Obama mouthpiece John Yarmuth about escalating costs and he absolutely ignored her question, didn't refute it just ignored it and went on an anti-gun tirade. I still believe that the AFFORDABLE Care Act is nothing more then round 1 to make the health insurance system collapse so that there is no choice but to adopt a national healthcare system yet we are soundly called paranoid when we express our concerns over how far into our every day lives government is reaching.