Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

249

Disclaimer/Warning: This is a sensitive topic. I do not mean to offend/insult/personally attack anyone, but to be thought-provoking.

This is purely factual.

Also, it is possible that many Poal users already know these facts, but I am also posting it here to show it to other people so I don't have to explain it every time.

Reader's discretion is advised.

While the young are independent, healthy and physically active, the elderly depend on massive medical care just to stay barely alive (i.e. spend one more day in their wheelchairs and rocking chairs), which is economically disastrous.

It's like trying to maintain a fleet of 1950/60-built Boeing 707's.
There are actually a few planes from the 50s that are still functional thanks to heavy maintenance, but maintaining big fleets of those would burn money ravenously.

It's similar with aging humans, except that “not maintaining them” would be ethically problematic, to put it politely.

Of course, the elderly have anyway, but I think I'd rather be cared for than be ditched, if I were a disabled person.

One should obviously not blame the elderly personally for being a burden on the health care systems (they built a lot of our world in their earlier lives after all), but instead the biggest flaw in human biology that allows all this to happen in first place is to blame.

Debunking bluepills and buzzwords

A friend just shared to me, which presents ageism, ableism, sexism, racism as wrong and unethical mindsets.

But in reality, in a nutshell:

  • Ageism simply means acknowledging the destructive biological effects of aging on the human body, and that elderly people are generally less capable and more dependent, which is objectively a bad thing because it restricts freedom.
  • Racism simply means acknowledging real biological and genetic differences between the different races of humans (e.g. IQ, tendencies of behavioural patterns, etc. ).
  • Sexism simply means acknowledging the biological distinctions between the two human genders.
  • Ableism simply means that one would rather not be confined to a wheelchair, be blind, suffer from dementia (= 90% brain dead) or depend on external help to feed oneself.

You are encouraged to share your thoughts.

**Disclaimer/Warning:** This is a sensitive topic. I do **not** mean to offend/insult/personally attack anyone, but to be thought-provoking. This is purely factual. Also, it is possible that many Poal users already know these facts, but I am also posting it here to show it to other people so I don't have to explain it every time. Reader's discretion is advised. ---- While the young are independent, healthy and physically active, the elderly depend on **massive** medical care just to stay **barely** alive (i.e. spend one more day in their wheelchairs and rocking chairs), which is economically disastrous. It's like trying to maintain a fleet of 1950/60-built Boeing 707's. There are actually a few planes from the 50s that are still functional thanks to heavy maintenance, but maintaining big fleets of those would burn money ravenously. It's similar with aging humans, except that *“not maintaining them”* would be ethically problematic, to put it politely. Of course, the elderly have [not much to lose](https://poal.co/s/ShowerThoughts/155401) anyway, but I think I'd rather be cared for than be ditched, if I were a disabled person. One should obviously not blame the elderly **personally** for being a burden on the health care systems (they built a lot of our world in their earlier lives after all), but instead the biggest flaw in human biology that allows all this to happen in first place is to blame. ---- ## **Debunking bluepills and buzzwords** A friend just shared [this bluepilled (politically correct) TED talk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfjzkO6_DEI) to me, which presents *ageism*, *ableism*, *sexism*, *racism* as wrong and unethical mindsets. But in reality, in a nutshell: * ***Ageism*** simply means acknowledging the destructive **biological** **effects** of aging on the human body, and that elderly people are generally less capable and more dependent, which is objectively a bad thing because it restricts freedom. * ***Racism*** simply means acknowledging real **biological and genetic differences** between the different races of humans (e.g. IQ, tendencies of behavioural patterns, etc. ). * ***Sexism*** simply means acknowledging the **biological distinctions** between the **two** human genders. * ***Ableism*** simply means that one would rather not be confined to a wheelchair, be blind, suffer from dementia (= 90% brain dead) or depend on external help to feed oneself. ---- You are encouraged to share your thoughts.

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

Why is "not maintaining them" ethically problematic? Their children should be the ones to take care of them at the end and no one else. Certainly not the government. With all the medical advancements we've had, it is massively expensive to take care of the elderly because so much is based on maintaining their decline until we can't.

I say those that die young (less than 80) are the lucky ones as they don't end up a slobbering blob of a mess at the end.

[–] • 0 pt

Why is "not maintaining them" ethically problematic?

Good question.

Because not maintaining them puts their life at risk.
But again, they don't have much to lose.

Yes, one could indeed say that just letting them die earlier liberates them from additional years of endless suffering, regarding that rational suicide is a thing.

I say those that die young (less than 80) are the lucky ones as they don't end up a slobbering blob of a mess at the end.

Yes, it can also be seen in that way.

Although one will be missed, very elderly people tend to be incapable of most things in life anyway. And when their brain starts to fail, they can't even communicate properly.

Thank you for sharing your thought-provoking comment.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Nice deep thought. It's not really accurate, as most old people are still in pretty good shape until they hit their mid 80's. Then they're fucked, as the body gives out bit by bit. A rare few live to 100+. No one lives past ~120.

As long as you're not in a bad accident, don't get cancer or an autoimmune disease, and exercise enough to maintain your balance, life is tolerable when old, until those damn 80's sneak in.

[–] • 0 pt

Due to improved medicine, people indeed stay healthy longer.

But it just somewhat delays the problem. It doesn't prevent it yet.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt (edited )

The more personal goal in life is to put off dying for as long as possible.

[–] • 1 pt

You're taking lots of showers today!

[–] • 1 pt

From the sidebar:

“Showerthought” is a loose term that applies to any thought you might have while carrying out a routine task like showering, driving, or daydreaming.

[–] • 0 pt

Quiet, you. Go take another shower, you dirty bastard!