Wednesday, July 20, 2011

NYT Brooks Promotes Eugenics "Death Panels" Amid Budget Crisis

Dees Illustration
Brandon Turbeville

In recent years, particularly since the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act   (Obamacare), there seems to have been an increase in the amount of commentary espousing the rationing of healthcare for the elderly, chronically ill, and the handicapped. Ever since the allegation (correct as it was) that the Obama health plan contained rationing and “death panels,” there has been a strange flurry of both denial and simultaneous support of the concept of health care rationing for some of the most vulnerable members of society.

With this in mind, the recent editorial by David Brooks that was published in the New York Times, titled Death and Budgets, should come as no surprise. In this article, Brooks argues that it is pointless to spend as much money as we currently do on individuals who will only benefit from a few months of life extension. He also asserts that the sick and the old have an obligation to the living; what has been deemed by others as a “duty to die.” Brooks even goes so far as to suggest the ridiculous idea that the current budget crisis is the result of old people who receive health care services in the last few months of their lives.

While some may laugh at the last sentence, Brooks actually states, “This fiscal crisis is about many things, but one of them is our inability to face death – our willingness to spend our nation into bankruptcy to extend life for a few more sickly months.”

Brooks writes that it is unfortunate that medical science has not progressed to the point where we “live longer, healthier lives and then die quickly” and laments the fact that most of the “achievements” of our system come in the form of methods to “marginally extend the lives of the very sick.”

Brooks also states, “Others disagree with this pessimistic view of medical progress. But that phrase, ‘marginally extend the lives of the very sick,’ should ring in the ears. Many of our budget problems spring from our quest to do just that.”

Brooks then goes on to cite some very alarming statistics, at least in the way in which they are presented to the reader. He writes, “The fiscal implications are all around. A large share of our health care spending is devoted to ill patients in the last phases of life. This sort of spending is growing fast. Americans spent $91 billion caring for Alzheimer’s patients in 2005. By 2015, according to Callahan and Nuland, the cost of Alzheimer’s will rise to $189 billion and by 2050 it is projected to rise to $1 trillion annually – double what Medicare costs right now.”

Barely able to contain his disappointment, Brooks continues, “Obviously, we are never going to cut off Alzheimer’s patients and leave them out on a hillside. We are never coercively going to give up on the old and the ailing. But it is hard to see us reducing health care inflation seriously unless people and their families are willing to do what Clendinen is doing – confront death and their obligations to the living.”

Yet, as cold-hearted and asinine as Brook’s theories may sound to some, the fact is that a great many academics, intellectuals, doctors, politicians, and even average citizens share his sentiment. At least, they share his sentiment when the sentiment is being applied to others.

Indeed, the mainstream media has been pumping steady propaganda in this regard, in an ultimate attempt to convince the American (and European) public to accept the denial of care to the elderly, sick, and handicapped in a population reduction and eugenics scheme that is very similar to the eugenics policies enacted in Hitler’s early Germany and early 20th century America. If one can convince the population that there are those who deserve a chance at life less than others; or, even more so, that those “less-deserving” individuals are actively reducing the quality of life for everyone else, then they will often easily look the other way while the undesirables are removed.

It has happened before, and it is happening now. Unfortunately, in our current society, which is vastly egocentric, it seems that less and less propaganda is required in order to convince the general public that their own fellow humans are dragging them down simply by virtue of their being alive.  Especially when the last remaining scraps of an imploding economy are being fought over.

There is no shortage of articles being published that espouse the idea that the elderly have a duty to die, or that the sick and infirm are a drain on society. Consider the now famous article published by Newsweek, entitled The Case for Killing Granny,  or this one published in the Daily Record: Leading Doctor: Should NHS Spend Millions Keeping Alive Terminally Ill Patients for Few Weeks?  Or this USA Today article that posits whether it is really worth it to incur end-of-life health care costs at all.

Consider, also, these statements made by Virginia Ironside regarding her opinion on what should be done to sick children.

Many of these comments seem eerily reminiscent of those made back in the open eugenics phase of the early 20th century.

David Brooks’ argument centers largely around cost and the fiscal crisis more than it does morality. Considering his position, it is safe to say that the author is as lacking in that department as he is in fiscal acumen.

The claim that “The fiscal crisis is driven largely by health care costs,” is completely erroneous for several reasons.  Brooks centers his argument around end-of-life care (specifically in the last few months of life) for the elderly and the chronically ill, and not health care costs in general. This, in itself, is misleading, because his claim of “health care costs” actually include everything from doctor’s visits for the common cold and baby deliveries, to that of kidney failure and cancer. Thus, he is falsely attributing costs to the elderly and end-of-life care where they do not necessarily exist.

Admittedly, there should be no argument with stating that health care costs are astronomical and unreasonable. There should be no argument that health care costs often bankrupt the individuals who are saddled with them and often prevent others from receiving the care they need. This much is a fact.

But it is also a fact that these financial burdens are more often than not picked up by the individuals who incurred them to begin with. Yes, there are those individuals who manage to receive care by virtue of the state and subsequently the taxpayers. But, by and large, this is not the general population of those receiving end-of-life care. Indeed, if these individuals are using Medicaid and Medicare (probably coupled with Social Security), one could scarcely argue that this is a drain on society since these were programs paid into by the overwhelming majority of those individuals receiving the benefits.

David Brooks, with his alarming statistics, would have you believe that end-of-life care is essentially taxpayer based. Brooks claims that Americans “spent $91 billion caring for Alzheimer’s patients in 2005.” However, while this much may be true, the presentation is grossly misleading, as it suggests a collectively accrued cost.  Therefore, when someone is diagnosed with Alzheimer’s they are a drain on all of us. A drain on society as a whole. A drain on the collective. This concept is often put forward, as we can see in the USA Today article:
But, increasingly, ethicists, economists and patient advocates are questioning whether the spending mentality is best for elderly patients or the long-term financial future of programs such as Medicare.
'We are going to double the number of people who are sick, old and frail in about 15 years,' says (geriatrician) Lynn. 'It would be a good thing to try on some ways of thinking about how to live that well ... and at a cost the community can sustain.'
Yet how many of these medical costs were incurred by private individuals with NO cost to the taxpayers?

Futhermore, Brooks fails to mention how many Alzheimer’s patients were being cared for in 2005. His article makes it sound as if $91 billion dollars was spent caring for a few hundred patients, but the fact is that millions of people have Alzheimer’s. Brooks’ article should have mentioned that $91 billion dollars was spent on caring for millions of Alzheimer’s patients. Of course, he didn’t, because if he did you might begin to realize how ridiculous his thesis actually is.

But perhaps Brooks’ most illogical claim is that the calamitous fiscal crisis is primarily the result of health care costs -- particularly end-of-life care. Although medical costs certainly play a part, one might have more success in solving the crisis if one were to look at issues such as the Federal Reserve, dollar devaluation, bank bailouts, six illegal wars, the war on drugs, vaccination programs, and useless federal agencies like TSA, DHS, and the like. All of which DO directly burden American taxpayers and will negatively affect our community for generations to come.  However, one might then be pressed to investigate a truly universal healthcare system (unlike Obamacare) which delivers affordable health care coverage to everyone. One might also be pressed to examine the fact that pharmaceutical companies are making astronomical profits that could be called gouging in a market that often means buying a product or facing death.

Ironically, both mainline Liberals and mainline Conservatives are likely to be persuaded by Brooks’ ridiculous arguments, and not just because of the general moral and intellectual decline of our nation. Similar to the early 1900s, Liberals are likely to accept the “duty to die” argument based upon their own worship of faith-based scientific fantasies and appeals to the collective, while Conservatives are likely to accept it as a result of an aversion to what they see as “paying the bill for someone else,” or the sacred cow known as the phony “free market.” Regardless, it seems that a majority of Americans have already given themselves over to the “duty to die” and “obligation to the living” arguments.

Perhaps it is as James Ridgeway writes for Mother Jones, “If I have any ‘obligation to the living,’ it’s to leave them with a better health care system than we have now – a health care system that values all human life above profits. But I know that’s not likely to happen before my death – which, if I listen to Brooks, could be right around the corner.”

One can only hope that David Brooks is aware that his eugenics theories may bring him some notoriety in certain circles, but they have also solidified his own obligation when he is faced with the same health issues that so many seniors are faced with today. In short, we are waiting to see whether or not the theories he has espoused for everyone else will be applied to his own life when the time comes.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University where he earned the Pee Dee Electric Scholar’s Award as an undergraduate. He has had numerous articles published dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, and civil liberties. He also the author of Codex Alimentarius - The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies and Five Sense Solutions

NOTE: Michael Rivero from What Really Happened provided the following important call to action:

PLEASE take a moment to send a very angry email to the editors of the New York Times expressing your utter disgust that the NY Times thinks old people should kill themselves to get the government that stole their Social Security off of the hook.

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Michael Rivero said...

The NY Times has stopped further commenting or I would inform Mr. Brooks that medical care for the people is not the cause of this fiscal crisis, but the selling of this nation into the control of a private central bank issuing all public currency at interest, a system which by design produces more debt than capital. The fiscal crisis is the end result of nearly 100 years of living under the very same system of finance this nation fought a revolution to be free of.

I would remind Mr, Brooks that the cleaning up of Wall Street's Mortgage Backed Securities Fraud has cost the nation an estimated $27 trillion (by Dylan Ratigan's figures) which far exceeds the social security and medical costs. I would also remind Mr, Brooks that the money for Social Security and medicare was already paid TO the government via payroll deductions, but is unavailable now only because the government then mis-spent the funds elsewhere, as can be seen by reading the transcript from the 1998 Senate Budget Committee session, specifically the comments made by Senatyor Hollings.

HOLLINGS: "Well, the truth is...ah, shoot, well, we all know there's Washington's math problem. Alan Sloan in this past week's Newsweek says he spends 150%. What we've been doing, Mr. Chairman, in all reality, is taken a hundred billion out of the Social Security Trust Fund, transferring it over to the spending column, and spending it. Our friends to the left here are getting their tax cuts, we getting our spending increases, and hollering surplus, surplus, and balanced budget, and balanced budget plans when we continue to spend a hundred billion more than we take in."

The US Government took the money of the American people on the pretense of proving care for them in later years, then spent that money on wars of conquest, Wall Street Bailouts, and endless tithes to Israel. And now that the government is broke and unable to keep their promises to the American taxpayer who paid for all this comes this absurd article from the New York Times suggesting that really patriotic Americans just kill themselves to get out of the government's way. Wjat is needed is a government that says, "We're sorry we embezzled your money and we resign" but what we get from Mr, Brooks is "You can solve the problem by killing yourselvesd!"

I suggest that if Mr. Brooks truly believes that death is the best solution to the nations fiscal policy that he lead by personal example.

PLEASE take a moment to send a very angry email to the editors of the New York Times expressing your utter disgust that the NY Times thinks old people should kill themselves to get the government that stole their Social Security off of the hook.

Anonymous said...

USA is starting to be a trsnscript of the movie, The meaning of Life, by the Monty Python.
Shitt its unbelivable and plain evil, moust of this cases is about autoimune disorders and Alzhaimer could be a result of anything from radiation to chemical poison from the industry.

We have waded into a heep og shitt and live in shitt, breath in shitt, eat shitt and when you have live som decades, this has consequenses.
Do you hear anybody talk about that,
My favorit Monty Pyhton film, and this is something everybody sould see, there is a secquence of where the PM is decribing "our common enemy", thats some of the best they have done.
And it highlights our world to day.

Activist said...

Terrific comments Michael and thank you for the link to the e-mail for the editors of NYT; I'll post that in the article as well.

Anonymous said...

..."I would suggest that if Mr. Brooks truly believes that death is the best solution to the nation's fiscal policy that he lead by personal example."

Couldn't agree more. Think the NYT will run the obituary?

Anonymous said...

I don’t see Mr. Brooks volunteering himself or his family to be first in the ‘termination chamber’. Maybe he has a mother or father he would offer up as the first ‘sacrificial lamb’ for the ‘collective good’.

Anonymous said...

Hospice centers provide the best quality of end of life care-patients like them,they are cost effective,the expensive medical cascade is avoided in this setting.Obama vetoed funding for hospices this year.So it is all about introducing the meme of eugenics to the masses.

Anonymous said...

I am so utterly disgusted!! I just don't have any words to describe how sick this Brooks guy is. A total fascist slob. He is doing the Rockefeller bidding for eugenicist movement.

I used to blow off the "culling" that people would speak about, but I have read too many books and articles with good references and sources now and how can any of us really believe these people have "our best interest" at heart?

What they have done will most likely end in a culling, and they will not have to do it by firing squad means; they will just cut the people off (like they are doing) from their livelihood.


Anonymous said...

News meant especially for conspiracy brainwashed morons like u to get panicked. Or maybe taxpayers should carry everyone in their backs, right?

Don said...

The fake war on terror has cost America 6 trillion so far, almost half of it's entire debt. What Brooks is asking for is not good for Americans, but is desired by the Luciferian bankers that own it.

gardenserf said...

Health care, lifespan, and death are all tied together, yet Americans have no real homogenous cultural view on any of it other than simply wanting to live longer. At the same time, most Americans do nothing to actually take care of themselves in the form of real prevention such as proper diet and exercise.

Live for today and don't plan tomorrow later leads to a fear of death as it soon approaches:

Throwing more money at pills and tubes at the end of life isn't going to fix it either. So deal with the fact that none of you are leaving here alive ;-)

Montana said...

You know what this current crowd of GOP liars want is to turn the United Sates into China, where only a few giant corporations run things, they own the factories, the apartments, the grocery stores, the gas stations, the newspaper and magazine publications, the radio stations, the television stations and you pay them and they get all the benefits, and if you do not like it go jump off cliff. Well some Chinese workers seeing that as individuals that they cannot progress have done just that by committing suicide.

The current crowd of GOP liars want to steal Medicare from the elderly, they want to abolish a woman’s right to choose and have control over her own body, they want to abolish collective bargaining rights for our Unions, and on top of it all they want to blame the poor, the middle class and the public sector workers for a recession that the GOP created (Thanks to the Dullard “W”), while their beloved “Fat cats” continue to pay themselves exorbitant salaries, bonuses, fringe benefits.

The GOP is like the “Chicken Littles” always saying that the “Sky is Falling”, like the same ones that were the “Chicken Hawks” (“W” Wars), big talk no courage.

The United States, favors creativity wherever it can be found. We’re apostles of prosperity and defenders of the free exchange of ideas and when more people in more countries are free to rise, to invent, to communicate, to dissent, it’s not the doom of United States leadership, its the triumph of the American way.

Generations have worked hard and sacrificed much for the country to reach this point (individuals and our Unions that represented our poor, the middle class and public sector workers), and with further hard work and sacrifice (along with our relentless self-doubt) the United States will rise again, we do not tire and we are coming back, no matter what Fox news and their GOP “Chicken Littles” lackies keep saying about our nation. The win in New York was the beginning but the next will be Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and later the other states of our nation, Never Bet Against the United States, watch out GOP, we are coming for you!

Anonymous said...

Collective moral bankruptcy is the inevitable consequence of a State that is given the power to make life and death decisions based on financial bankruptcy.

Anonymous said...

All you useless eaters need to hurry up and DIE. You are such terrible scum. I orgasm over the thought of dominating you peasants unto eternity as I know radical technology will keep me alive forever even if it costs trillions per day.

- David Brooks

Post a Comment