We need to address the social and economic implications
of ageing and longevity. Unfortunately, our governments
seen reluctant to do this. There's a lot of noise but
very little action.

I remember the ABC airing its Lateline investigation into
Australia's Aged Care System. It was horrific.
People being dehumanised. People the system was meant
to protect. People whose spirits were dead and their
bodies were waiting to catch up.

What is needed seems to be national standards of aged-care
training and accreditation. There seems to be
a huge difference between facilities and their staff.
Some aged-care workers receive only minimal training -
and are not qualified to cope with problems like dementia.

Aged care workers are some of the lowest paid in Australia
and there is often insufficient support for informal
carers.

People are not going to consider a career in Aged Care if
they're going to earn more elsewhere.

Families also have to take responsibility for their elderly.
They need to visit often and make sure that their family
member is being cared for - whether they are living at home
or in a facility. Families have to get involved.

I think a few have the wrong idea here o sung wu, being against the death penalty even for really nasty crims, I can't imagine you are personally pro a death penalty for oldies. This is a report I believe.
I am inclined to be more like Philip S in my choice of savings.

I would have grandfather clauses in all other welfare. Supporting parents, unemployment & disability should all have a time limit with no extension until an equal period on no payment had expired.

Public housing occupation should be limited to 2 years, offering short term help, not a life time subsidy, & all government funded superannuation payments should be cut to 150% of the age pension.

A cut of 50% of funding to universities, & the closing of all quangos, & government boards would save heaps. We could then start the reintroduction of various boards we really need.

o sung wu - Congratulation your idea has been adopted, we need to save more money who is next, we can save billions by exterminating everyone who is going to be covered by the NDIS. We are on our way to a surplus.

Since your scheme partially depends on time frames think how much we will save by exterminating anyone who has been on welfare more than 1 year but that will only happen after a panel of experts determines that they would be unlikely to be employed by any organization in the future.

Our Aged Care System needs reform.
We need governments who are socially
aware as well as financially responsible.

Governments who are capable of balancing
the two. Currently we have a government
who makes noises of being socially aware -
but they love a surplus. The Opposition appears
to be socially aware but their economic management
has yet to be tested. We ned a government that can
balance the ledger and balance things socially.
We don't do hung Parliaments or minority parties
very well.

Where can we find what we need?

Of course ladies and gentlemen, this bizarre proposition emanated from one with a somewhat esoteric and arcane mind that tended more to reside in an abstract world of delusion and fallacy. Rather then being firmly riveted in a world of reality and authenticity !

Who's to say though there may surely come a day, where there's a completely new way of analysing the many complications that are now emerging in our new world, where there's a need for a pre-determined mandated life-span, one that's been regulated by law ?

Too many people; too fewer vacancies of adequate housing; insufficient availability of qualified doctors; and an inordinately high demand on available Doctor's time,; Chronic shortages of basic food staples ? And so it goes on ?

Maybe the government of the day has no other viable option, than to 'thin out' the human population somewhat ? Who knows ?

Can anybody on this Forum state categorically that some future government, won't decree one day, that it's now necessary to carefully cull or 'thin-out' the older population, in order to make way for the younger, more productive and resilient inhabitants to come through, and assist in helping to strengthen the new society ? In order to better spread the remaining meagre resources and the more important food staples, among the younger, more productive folk ?

One thing is for sure. Given my age and level of health, I would expect to be identified as one of the first candidates in line, for selection to be culled ? But knowing governments and politicians like I do, I'd bet they'd more then likely bugger it up, the first couple of times they'd try to introduce such a practice ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

If I may improve on your suggestion, perhaps people should be called to the committee as early as when they turn 30 - that's old enough, nay why do you even need a committee, just vapourise anyone who gets to be 30... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan%27s_Run_%28film%29