Assisted dying back on the table.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Will companies involved in this seek to dismantle health and social care in order to maximise profits?

[Aruntraveller]

Will companies involved in this seek to dismantle health and social care in order to maximise profits?

No but I expect them to target those who believe in a life after death, after all you will just be moving on to another plane, so nothing to fear about an early departure.

[floo]

I find it odd that people who believe they are going to heaven, are often the ones who are desperate to stay down here as long as possible.

[SteveH]

I find it odd that people who believe they are going to heaven, are often the ones who are desperate to stay down here as long as possible.

Evidence? No, thought not.

[Nearly Sane]

Will companies involved in this seek to dismantle health and social care in order to maximise profits?

How would that work then?

[floo]

Evidence? No, thought not.

And have you any evidence to the contrary?

[Nearly Sane]

And have you any evidence to the contrary?

Your claim, your burden of proof.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

How would that work then?

Any way they could make it work. There are probably accountants working out the balance between care and assisted death in order to maximise profits.
If for example you could be despatched because you were miserable, companies would promote misery and despondency.

[Nearly Sane]

Any way they could make it work. There are probably accountants working out the balance between care and assisted death in order to maximise profits.
If for example you could be despatched because you were miserable, companies would promote misery and despondency.

Are there really? As SteveH said to Littleroses 'Evidence? No, thought not.'

[Aruntraveller]

companies would promote misery and despondency.

We've got a Tory government doing that already, so that avenue is already filled.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

We've got a Tory government doing that already,

Privatisation.

[floo]

Your claim, your burden of proof.

A number of 'born again ' Christians I have known in my life have fought hard against the odds to stay alive, when they were terminally ill and in terrible pain. Surely if they thought they were going to the paradise they believed heaven to be, they wouldn't put up such a fight to stay down here?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Are there really? As SteveH said to Littleroses 'Evidence? No, thought not.'

I think you are naïve not to believe that people will be eyeing this up as a potential financial opportunity...or do you expect taxpayers who are not in agreement with it to foot the bill as part of the overall tax take?

[Nearly Sane]

I think you are naïve not to believe that people will be eyeing this up as a potential financial opportunity...or do you expect taxpayers who are not in agreement with it to foot the bill as part of the overall tax take?

So that would be a no to the evidence then.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

A number of 'born again ' Christians I have known in my life have fought hard against the odds to stay alive, when they were terminally ill and in terrible pain. Surely if they thought they were going to the paradise they believed heaven to be, they wouldn't put up such a fight to stay down here?

Survival is built in. It's hard to fight against. Just like one's ration of intelligence or looks LR.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So that would be a no to the evidence then.

I'm happy to let it pass as an opinion Sane.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm happy to let it pass as an opinion Sane.

If you wanted to make profits, wouldn't it be better to have people suffering for a longer time in incredible pain and humiliation and taking 'care' of them and selling lots of expensive drugs?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you wanted to make profits, wouldn't it be better to have people suffering for a longer time in incredible pain and humiliation and taking 'care' of them and selling lots of expensive drugs?

Yes that is a danger I cover in my opening post.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes that is a danger I cover in my opening post.

No, you don't, your post talks about assisted dying,not the maintaining of the current status where you pay your tax to keep people suffering in pain they don't want.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, you don't, your post talks about assisted dying,not the maintaining of the current status where you pay your tax to keep people suffering in pain they don't want.

So you would pay tax to have people ''cough cough'' then and have everybody paying for it?
I'm afraid if you are pro assisted dying you cannot avoid these questions Sane.
What type of people are you going to attract?
What happens to those who refuse?
Are firms going to take measures to maximise their business?
Are relatives going to force people to do it?
Is being a burden on people going to hustle people into doing it?
Are miserable people going to be allowed it?

[Nearly Sane]

So you would pay tax to have people ''rubbed out'' then and have everybody paying for it?
I'm afraid if you are pro assisted dying you cannot avoid these questions Sane.
What type of people are you going to attract?
What happens to those who refuse?
Are firms going to take measures to maximise their business?
Are relatives going to force people to do it?
Is being a burden on people going to hustle people into doing it?
Are miserable people going to be allowed it?

I see you avoided the issue there so I might choose to follow your lead,but I won't because I think the issue needs serious discussion not simplistic grandstanding. Though I have to note your questions are mostly unclear.


'So you would pay tax to have people ''rubbed out'' then and have everybody paying for it?' Yes, just as I pay tax for abortions to be carried out on the NHS. It's the right of the individuals here that I want to support and I would hate it if someone was told, you can only make that choice if you have money.



'What type of people are you going to attract?'

To what?


' What happens to those who refuse?'


Refuse what?


'Are firms going to take measures to maximise their business?'
Possibly but you will have to lay out what that means n this context.



'Are relatives going to force people to do it?'

Any legislation would aim to ensure this doesn't happen But in the current situation you,  non relative, are forcing people to endure pain and humiliation

'is being a burden on people going to hustle people into doing it?'

Again any legislation must aim to avoid this


'Are miserable people going to be allowed it?' My take is no, it's about medically defined conditions that are about physical as well as mental pain and suffering.


I don't think there is an easy simple moral answer here, and where you have been clear, you have raised valid issues. But there is no side on this that will have clean hands. If you want a proper discussion, I am all for it but if you just want indulge in some game playing about anyone who thinks assisted dying is acceptable in certain circumstance is a mobster who wants to kill I'll! People to get at the money under the mattress,then I will pass.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

'What type of people are you going to attract?'

To what?

To the job of terminating people


'

What happens to those who refuse?'


Refuse what?

refuse to terminate people. You are proposing that this is done on the NHS aren't you?

'Are firms going to take measures to maximise their business?'
Possibly but you will have to lay out what that means n this context.

How does any business maximise profit
By promoting itself, by being competitive and by lobbying government for a favourable environment for it's own business

'Are relatives going to force people to do it?'

Any legislation would aim to ensure this doesn't happen But in the current situation you,  non relative, are forcing people to endure pain and humiliation

Pain is a problem but it comes down to allowing pain and killing. Not sure by what you mean by humiliation. Who is being humiliated?

'is being a burden on people going to hustle people into doing it?'

Again any legislation must aim to avoid this


'Are miserable people going to be allowed it?' My take is no, it's about medically defined conditions that are about physical as well as mental pain and suffering.


I don't think there is an easy simple moral answer here, and where you have been clear, you have raised valid issues. But there is no side on this that will have clean hands. If you want a proper discussion, I am all for it but if you just want indulge in some game playing about anyone who thinks assisted dying is acceptable in certain circumstance is a mobster who wants to kill I'll! People to get at the money under the mattress,then I will pass.
[/quote]
I am not game playing at all.
I just have a different view from yours. Something you should perhaps learn to accept?

[Nearly Sane]

To the job of terminating people


' refuse to terminate people. You are proposing that this is done on the NHS aren't you?

How does any business maximise profit
By promoting itself, by being competitive and by lobbying government for a favourable environment for it's own business


 Pain is a problem but it comes down to allowing pain and killing. Not sure by what you mean by humiliation. Who is being humiliated?

'is being a burden on people going to hustle people into doing it?'

Again any legislation must aim to avoid this


'Are miserable people going to be allowed it?' My take is no, it's about medically defined conditions that are about physical as well as mental pain and suffering.


I don't think there is an easy simple moral answer here, and where you have been clear, you have raised valid issues. But there is no side on this that will have clean hands. If you want a proper discussion, I am all for it but if you just want indulge in some game playing about anyone who thinks assisted dying is acceptable in certain circumstance is a mobster who wants to kill I'll! People to get at the money under the mattress,then I will pass.

I am not game playing at all.
I just have a different view from yours. Something you should perhaps learn to accept?

Which is something that my post made quite clear I do. So given you continued with the gameplaying, and then lied about my position, then I will leave you to whatever you hope to achieve here.

[Robbie]

Evidence? No, thought not.

I also wondered about that. Indeed if people who are 'believers' accept they have a terminal illness, they will accept it but it's normal and human to want to make the most of life and to prolong it because it's what we know. Also life is to be celebrated and enjoyed as well as used to best of our abilities. I love life & hope it will continue for a while; if it becomes obvious it won't I will accept the inevitable. If we didn't feel that way we might as well die as soon as born and who wants that? It's such an interesting world.

[SteveH]

And have you any evidence to the contrary?

You made the assertion - it's up to you to provide evidence. Nevertheless, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-briggs/facing-death-how-religion_b_6701596.html (Not that that proves anything about the truth or otherwise of religious belief, of course.)