War can bring benefits to the country/people ruling the country.
Suicide and euthanasia of a relatively healthy person is a waste of resources from the system's perspective.
A dead person does not create, buy, sell, or consume...
But I still wonder why euthanasia is a taboo subject.
We put pets to sleep when they suffer.
We try to keep people alive by force.
In my opinion, euthanasia of people who are practically immobilized by illness is a logical solution.
Every such person should have the right to die.
If we do not want to be guided by morality, why are we not guided by pragmatism?
I do not know what the financial issues look like, but it seems to me that maintaining a sick person is more expensive for the system than euthanizing such a person.
But I may be wrong, because I have gaps in my knowledge.
In the first place, I would allow euthanasia for people who are bedridden and suffering. Later we can think about people suffering from incurable diseases, but still functioning relatively normally.
I also have a controversial idea that every old person could euthanize themselves on request.
I understand why politicians avoid this topic, but why does society avoid it?
Do people really want to fight a losing battle and only increase their suffering?
It makes no sense to me.
Someone will say that doctors should always fight for life.
But for me it has nothing to do with humanitarianism.
Allowing euthanasia in hopeless cases is moral.
Saving resources is pragmatic.