Hacker News Reader

Comment by thinkingkong | Hacker News Reader

It might be too much of an extrapolation but theres quite an odd cultural phenomenon around death in north america. It almost feels as though people think you deserve to die if you’re poor, get sick, dont currently have benefits, etc. There’s a massive for profit institution obsessed with extracting maximim value from you before you die. If you do, it was your responsibility anyway.

We dont really care about people living, or their quality of life. We care about the metrics sureounding those things, and gaming them to the maximum extent permitted by law.

View on HN

I've noticed this too - it's horrifying. Just the complete ambivalence to death. From covid to gun deaths, traffic accidents + pedestrians being killed by cars to overdoses and suicides. Not to mention all the preventable deaths from lack of access to medical care. If the solution involves "the state", we'd rather just not bother and fighting "government overreach" at the cost of mass death is a completely common position. No license plate cameras, no gun registries, no mental health institution funding, no universal health care. People are starting to overturn vaccines rules about preventing childhood diseases. Rather than acknowledge the utility of some of these interventions and work around any potential downside, just rule out any coordinated action and hope for the best.

Those numerous and recent examples you listed show us that many people would actually rather die and/or contribute to others dying than be told what to do. Rugged Individualism has become elevated to near pseudo-religion, that people are swearing their lives to.

Do you value life more, or freedom more? The answer may change, generation to generation.

This whole thread really just makes me realize how severe our filter bubbles, echo chambers and distrust of "the other side" has become.

Nobody wants poor people to die and nobody has a religious adherence to "rugged individualism". If you go actually talk to people who disagree with you, instead of reading ridiculous descriptions of their motivations from people inside your bubble who hate them, you might gain an appreciation of their concerns.

I'm amazed at how 4 years of the Trump administration didn't result in Liberals becoming much more open-minded to Libertarian concerns about concentrated power in the federal government. How did we come through that experience without more people saying "OK, I get it now, maybe I don't want so much power and control over my life held by the white house".

100% correct. You hit the nail right on the head. People are dehumanizing other groups by refusing to actually speak with them. This makes it easier for them to discriminate against such groups. The end game of the dehumanizing process is not good if you follow history at all.

People in general are much more reasonable in person than the internet would lead you to believe.

It's not that people are ambivalent to death. It's that a certain amount of death is going to happen. You can't legislate it away. Some of us think we've reached the point of diminishing returns on many topics and don't think giving up liberties will do much good.

No I don't want cameras. No I don't want backdoor encryption. No I don't want gun registries. No I don't want the Fed's to have more money or power.

They are not looking out for our best interests most of the time.

Hackernews never fails to deliver. The comments here are perfectly indicative.

Pretending that implementing a sane healthcare system like Germany or Switzerland is "giving up liberty" relies on the assumption that the tens of millions of Americans without healthcare somehow have more "freedom" than they otherwise would if they could get regular checkups or receive health care that doesn't bankrupt them. Or that there's somehow "freedom" in being tied to a job you don't like solely because of the health insurance coverage. We already more pay per capita for government-run healthcare than e.g. Canada does, except it only covers our poorest and oldest citizens. Just a silly selfish view of 'freedom'.

Agree - someone that's dead has no freedom at all.

And someone who is free can choose to be as cautious as they please. They just can’t force their choices on everyone else.

I’m not sure I understand - are you arguing that universal healthcare is having a choice forced on you?

Nowhere in my comment did I say anything about healthcare systems. I specifically discussed being surveilled or otherwise controlled.

> around death in north america

I would just like to clarify - Canada is in North America and it is nothing like you describe above. Actually it's quite the opposite, our healthcare means we're literally all-in to help each other.

You're talking about the United States, not "North America"

Canada actively promotes suicide.

I've been living here 15 years, and my partner works in healthcare. I've never once heard of suicide being "promoted".

If you mean that assisted suicide is legal in Canada under very strict circumstances for terminally ill people, then yes, that is correct.

It's legal in multiple developed countries around the world.

Personally, after watching my Mum be eaten alive by Cancer that spread from her lungs to her bones to all her organs, I think it's merciful and much needed.

They aren’t strict at all and pretty much anyone that wants it can get it.

https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-toronto-7c63...

> Disability experts say the story is not unique in Canada, which arguably has the world’s most permissive euthanasia rules — allowing people with serious disabilities to choose to be killed in the absence of any other medical issue

Absolutely disgusting and barbaric.

> Absolutely disgusting and barbaric

You think it's disgusting and barbaric to allow people to make their own decisions about their own life?

I, ah, disagree with you. I personally think people should be allowed to choose what they do with their own life. Personal Freedom and all that.

> You think it's disgusting and barbaric to allow people to make their own decisions about their own life?

No, I think it’s awful that the state will kill people that are not terminally ill. These aren’t the “strict circumstances” you justified this with initially. Now it’s a “personal freedom” thing? And the state should assist in this? Killing someone’s who is sad isn’t a mercy killing like your mother had. It’s active promotion of suicide.

Ridiculous. And still disgusting and barbaric.

> No, I think it’s awful that the state will kill people that are not terminally ill

Give it a rest, the state is a not "killing" anyone.

"The State" allows people to choose to end their own life if they want to.

"Actually it's quite the opposite, our healthcare means we're literally all-in to help each other."

This sounds like someone who has never had significant interactions with the Canadian healthcare system...

Been living here for 15 years now. Broken leg, broken nose, minor day surgery, partner just about to have a baby. Plenty of interactions.

Talk to me after you or a loved one has something "non-routine".

Many shoulder shrugs, year long waitlists, misdiagnoses, not respecting DNRs, etc

I don't think Canada is terribly different. It has the same who cares attitude toward car deaths as the USA.

This is the entire premise of the book “Being Mortal”, highly recommend as a read.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com