Crisis brings out the worst in many. To the down and dirty. The gates of Hell knocked upon. What was once inconceivable, now possible.

The elderly have become an open burden to society. The coronavirus society that we now live in. The elderly the most sickly. The elderly the most costly from a medical perspective.

They are ruining our society. The only way to resolve the economic burden they impose is to let them die.

Texas Lt. Governor Dan Patrick shared his philosophy on the issue. Simply stated, a senior citizen should be allowed to sacrifice himself for the greater economic good. It went viral!

Patrick is 70 by the way. He is willing to sacrifice himself. A better civil servant cannot be found. Willing to die for the many! A great guy! He does not have to die for the many to make me happy. Merely die for me!

I am not ready to go!

Patrick is unhappy that most seniors are not prepared to commit the equivalent of mass suicide to salvage their grandchildren’s jobs. The economic well being of the U.S. is more important than the lives of older people.

Some have children and grandchildren they would die for. Others, not. The question arises as to whether they are worth dying for. Many have been raised selfishly and are a non caring generation. The old of today are not treated as they treated the elderly when they were young.

Patrick is upset because “no one reached out to me and said, as a senior citizen, are you willing to take a chance on your survival in exchange for keeping the America that all America loves for your children and grandchildren?” He added, “If that’s the exchange. I’m all in.”

Patrick can go to the head of the line.

This Patrick talk and similar talk of others comes to us via Trump.

Trump has been dancing around the issue this week, without specifically spelling it out. He will in due course.

Trump has been framing the dilemma as either save the entire U.S. economy or tolerate a few more deaths. That is part of his Sunday tweet: “We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself.”

Trump wants to lift quarantines early and get some if not all back to work, while leaving the seniors sheltering in place.

The implication is that older people are a burden on society and should be willing to risk being infected by coronavirus to make sure all Americans are able to patronize bars, restaurants, and stores.

In Patrick’s words, “Let’s get back to work…..Those of us who are 70-plus, we’ll take care of ourselves. But don’t sacrifice the country.”

Aging is skewing the way we view coronavirus. The elderly are one segment of the population. They are at greater risk because of the virus.

The idea being promoted is that all older Americans are frail and vulnerable while the younger are invincible. Not true. Nearly 40 percent of the 2,500 patients needing hospitalization over the past few weeks were 20-54.

The invincibility factor is why the young have been congregating without fear on Florida beaches.

I read somewhere this week that coronavirus is becoming a “boomer remover” sentiment.

If the elderly are useless, why have so many Governors asked retired health care workers to volunteer their services? Despite the retired being elderly and more susceptible to the virus.

If everyone had adopted the idea that the elderly were expendable and useless, their help would not have been solicited.

The issue is wrapped in amusement. Trump is 78, Biden 77, Pelosi 79, Dr. Fauci 79. Will they be part of the “elderly” group not to receive appropriate medical care, etc.? Or as was done with certain professional basketball players recently, will the “important elderly” be cloistered and permitted to receive what is necessary?

Many Senators and House members fall into the 70 plus category. Will they be part of the “important elderly?”

Pence is an extremely religious man. A right to life and anti-abortion advocate. What would his position be?

Trump ran on a right to life platform.

There is a serious ethical question involved. The shut down of human life.

Two problems have highlighted the age issue. The first is the aged being more vulnerable. The other that medical facilities are being overwhelmed. They would not be overwhelmed if proper care for the elderly were not part of the consideration.

Italy’s medical facilities have been overwhelmed. Eighty five percent of those who died were over 70.

The problem in Italy obviously acute. As it has become in the U.S. The Italian College of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care have issued “guidelines” for doctors and nurses.

Respirators are in short supply, for example. The guidance for such and any other medical items required to provide care from beds to whatever must adhere to the guidelines which include: “It may become necessary to establish an age limit for access to intensive care.” In other words, those that are too old to have a good chance of recovery, or who (probably) have a few years to live, will be allowed to die.

Triage strictly enforced the rule.

Very possible in the U.S. if Trump. Patrick and others of similar thinking have their way.

A 57 year old California lawyer went viral recently. His position a simple one. Seventy five is long enough to live. Life ends for all in the U.S. at 75.

Can you imagine! Everyone drinking the hemlock!

Florida Governor DeSantis a disappointment. He is a true Trump follower. Blindly. Recall how he conducted his campaign.

DeSantis does not believe “shelter in place” would work. He believes it will keep people out of work.

A Cuomo he is not.

My recollection is Florida has the largest elderly population in the U.S. I wonder how DeSantis is going to do the next time he runs.

Seniors beware! Understand what is going on. Do not be taken in. Do not drink the hemlock. Throw it in their faces, if offered.

Enjoy your day! Assuming it is possible after my tirade.




  1. Why not look at a solution a different way. What about taking away half of the money of everyone who has over a million dollars (or 5 mil or 10 mil, whatever) as a way to allow everyone to live? Many of those with that kind of money are elderly anyway and subject to be part of the “solution” anyhow, right? Lets ask them “give us half your money, or die – what’s it gonna be, gramps?) and see what they say?

  2. Die now and pay off the student loans with the old folks savings. Nancy first to jump in to the volcano, all over 65 next. yes Lou you are correct

  3. Lou’s topic today reminds me of Colorado governor Richard Lamm, who said in 1984 that elderly people who are terminally ill have a ”duty to die and get out of the way” instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means, His position was controversial of course, but a surprising number of people agreed with him. Gov. Lamm was age 48 when he made the comments. He is currently age 84 and apparently good health.

  4. For a so-called Christian nation, we appear to have totally lost our way for years. Perhaps the plague is one of God’s judgments on the world. Anyone advocating letting humans die of any age needs to seriously look at their anti-abortion arguments for “pre-humans.”

    • I would agree. Our “christian” nation took a decidedly turn for the worse when the “Christians” took over and the blur between church and state became a reality.

      Ironic that Christians ruined everything, isn’t it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *