If someone is living in suffering, it is better to give them the option to end their life if they want, than to insist that they keep on living just because they “could” continue to live for many years more.
This seems like carte blanche to slowly take away all complex social care programs, and just have the resulting suffering people kill themselves.
This is you indirectly imposing your choice onto other people (e.g. you vote for a government which does the imposition on your behalf.)
I'm all for social programs (or whatever the equivalent of "few hundred dollars per month is"). But why not let the individual decide on whether to die or not?
No one should be confronted with the choice of whether to take their own life to make things simpler for others - living for your own sake, no matter how much of a burden you may be on others, is a basic right that assisted suicide programs can easily start infringing if not implemented very carefully.
Underneath all of this society is messaging that it has too many people, particularly a growing body of people not contributing in a substantial way to the well-being of that society. Some people are worth more dead than alive to government actuaries.
Problem with statements like that is defining "suffering" such that inappropriate situation like a depressed teenager isn't allowed to happen.
When you consider that dying of Covid was considered to be a fine sacrifice to make to keep the economy flowing, you realize there isn't really even a principled objection to dying under your own terms.
What you call "the economy" is actually people living normal lives, trying their best to make joy in a finite lifetime. It is exactly quality of life. Covid shutdowns exactly prioritized quantity over quality.
If as a society we cannot permit the risk dying of Covid or indeed any other risk in life, we may as well stick people in a pod a la battery cells in The Matrix so that they live maximally safe lives.