These are the arguments we saw in the 1930's under the regime that Hitler took over and made his own. Once you have killed off all the oldies, who then will you recommend this group turn its attention to, hmm? There are so many flaws in this argument it is hard to know where to begin. So I won't. I would suggest that if this is the result of all the hard work that the oldies put in to raising people such as yourself, then we were wrong. Go back to the drawing board, dear, and gather ALL the facts before making such absurd hypotheses and projecting them on to an unsuspecting public.

According to the editor of the Bulletin of Medical Ethics, Richard Nicholson (in the 6/10/06 (London) Times Higher Education Supplement), half the money that will ever be spent on an individual's health care will be spent in the last six months of life. It is dying that is particularly expensive, not aging.

The problem is known and identified in this article. Without a solution being stated...there is a reason...

In terms of cost, the three main areas of cost is infrastructure(hospitals, equipment, maintence...most thankfully established...and provided no future parliament acts to sell it to private sector...we should be ok...), then staff(wages...which for work done is lower than due...all suffer and why Victorian nurses striking was repulsive...they already have controlled work enviroment...4patients/nurse...everybody else respond to work demand which varies from twidling you thumbs for hours to knee deep in blood and guts...just the nature of the field...and paid more/hour than most including junior doctors who take on far more liabilities....and want more because other states are paying more...), and finally cost of investigations/medicine...its where the cost escalates with technology and time...eg mri 250-600+dollars...did not exist 20 years ago...

So forseeable that to keep population healthier and living longer is going to carve out bigger chunks of budget...till something cracks...

Solutions are so unpaltable that nobody want to be the first to say them...eg criteria to who should recieve curative treatment and whom supportive treatment only etc...I think as a society we have to come to terms with death and dying, as we have about living...and perhaps not choosing agressive medicine to live a few years more...so the money can be used on babies and children to live a whole life...eg see 'results' as example http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/75500891/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 ...liver metasis in cancer meant rapid death 20 years ago...now "per life year gained with HAI vs. systemic chemotherapy: £24,604'...meaning still death but get more time...

Sam
Ps~medical practice becoming investigation based...moving away from 'skills of history/examination' based diagnosis where well trained doctors can arrive at diagnosis without blind battery of tests but highly selected ones...and decreasing costs...for this to happen the medical schools in Australia are going to need a through overhaul...

The first few lines says it all, although a casual glance at an everyday GP surgery waiting room will indicate that increasing lifestyle related medical costs are rather more 'across the board' than this article seems to suggest - much of the money seems to go on the younger members of society.
Perhaps some of the money thrown at Medicare would be better spent in subsidising fresh fruit and vegetables, and gym subscriptions. It seems to me that the majority of health problems could be prevented or corrected by appropriate lifestyle modifications. How anyone in this day and age is dumb enough to smoke, and to drink to excess, is beyond my comprehension.

Reducing the amount spent on preserving lives that extra 6 or 12 months needn't be "unpalatable", provided it occurs as a result of those who have no wish to have their lives so extended having the option of accepting that their time has come. Something like 80% of Australians support voluntary euthanasia, so presumably most of us would be prepared to make such a choice when it becomes clear that our condition is almost certainly terminal, and that our only respite is drugs and life-support machinery.

The Centre for Independent Studies is a right wing think tank that is hell bent on turning Australia into a meaner nastier society where immigrants get half the pay of Australians and health care is used as a wedge politics of intergenerational conflict.

The Liberals really want a user pays health care system with no discussion on euthanasia. Like many Asutralians I can't see the virture of suffering from terminal disability in fear and pain. I resent catholics imposing their beliefs on the community.

I am sure that eliminating the private health fund rebate and retaining ownership of medibank private will control health costs. If we have overseas ownership of private health funds the federal government will be improving the profitability of those funds with limited audit of their financial operations.