The idea that life has value simply because it's a life is a worthless value in itself and has no basis in reality.
If an old person does not have the resources to care for themselves, then the end result is that they should die. Under no circumstance should young people be obligated out of anything other than their own sense of charity to aid old people. Forcing young people to care for the old by using the government's monopoly on power only helps to degenerate a society.
I assume Japan has a universal healthcare system which is a problem. What they should do is privatize the healthcare system and if old people can't afford healthcare, then so be it, they die. The less "socialized" anything Japan has, the better the outcome will be for everyone.
Taking care of the elderly might not be directly beneficial, but it's important for society's morale. Nobody wants to see someone benefit society for 40-50 years and then get tossed aside like garbage the second they're infirm. Why would anyone want to spend their best years working if that was the case?
It also shows a respect for elders and a willingness to learn from them, which is good for preserving a society's values. It's something which western society is sorely lacking right now.
Then make the care entirely voluntary. If it is such a moral prerogative then surely the people will do so on their own without the government holding a gun to their head and forcing them to, right?
Charity should be entirely voluntary, yes, but that doesn't mean I agree that old people should just die if they don't have resources. Maybe if the government didn't rob us of our income, tax us for our land, burden us with endless fees, devalue what we have left through inflation and otherwise meddle and make everything worse, private aged care would be affordable without handouts.
This is a real argument and I would agree with you. Given that the government fucked things up, they owe it to old people to correct for their mistakes but I do think there's some give-and-take required. How many of those old Japanese people supported the very governments that fucked things up and were against the opposing parties that tried to fix things? If Japan can use this crisis to overall improve its society but old people might need to sacrifice a little for the betterment of the future generation, I think that's something reasonable for the old people to accept. Unfortunately, anything that deals with the government is going to be unfair to someone in the end. The entire existence of government is to redistribute fairness away from what would be fair naturally without a government.
The idea that life has value simply because it's a life is a worthless value in itself and has no basis in reality.
If an old person does not have the resources to care for themselves, then the end result is that they should die. Under no circumstance should young people be obligated out of anything other than their own sense of charity to aid old people. Forcing young people to care for the old by using the government's monopoly on power only helps to degenerate a society.
I assume Japan has a universal healthcare system which is a problem. What they should do is privatize the healthcare system and if old people can't afford healthcare, then so be it, they die. The less "socialized" anything Japan has, the better the outcome will be for everyone.
Taking care of the elderly might not be directly beneficial, but it's important for society's morale. Nobody wants to see someone benefit society for 40-50 years and then get tossed aside like garbage the second they're infirm. Why would anyone want to spend their best years working if that was the case?
It also shows a respect for elders and a willingness to learn from them, which is good for preserving a society's values. It's something which western society is sorely lacking right now.
Then make the care entirely voluntary. If it is such a moral prerogative then surely the people will do so on their own without the government holding a gun to their head and forcing them to, right?
Charity should be entirely voluntary, yes, but that doesn't mean I agree that old people should just die if they don't have resources. Maybe if the government didn't rob us of our income, tax us for our land, burden us with endless fees, devalue what we have left through inflation and otherwise meddle and make everything worse, private aged care would be affordable without handouts.
This is a real argument and I would agree with you. Given that the government fucked things up, they owe it to old people to correct for their mistakes but I do think there's some give-and-take required. How many of those old Japanese people supported the very governments that fucked things up and were against the opposing parties that tried to fix things? If Japan can use this crisis to overall improve its society but old people might need to sacrifice a little for the betterment of the future generation, I think that's something reasonable for the old people to accept. Unfortunately, anything that deals with the government is going to be unfair to someone in the end. The entire existence of government is to redistribute fairness away from what would be fair naturally without a government.