Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Guest
Fuck it all, bring on a committee with strict guidelines on your usefulness to society based on your skills, education, wealth and other factors. If you're a overall negative on our resources, at 60-65 you should be euthanized to make way for productive members of society. If you still pass the contribution test stay alive until 75-80, however once your medical costs reach a predetermined level, pull the plug, cremate you and use your ashes to enrich the soil.
Let younger people move up and take positions of power, take money from the wealthy to educate the brightest students. If children have IQs less than 100, euthanize them as well, they will be a burden in the long run, end it now and save the trouble. You could use low intelligence people for various drug studies to further research to help the elite producers.
Use prisoners as forced organs donors for productive members of society, then do away with them also.
Social Darwinism at its best, let the smart, strong thrive and use the rest for societies overall good.
Let younger people move up and take positions of power, take money from the wealthy to educate the brightest students. If children have IQs less than 100, euthanize them as well, they will be a burden in the long run, end it now and save the trouble. You could use low intelligence people for various drug studies to further research to help the elite producers.
Use prisoners as forced organs donors for productive members of society, then do away with them also.
Social Darwinism at its best, let the smart, strong thrive and use the rest for societies overall good.