Soylent Green will be for Everyone, eventually!

 
Probably not too many of you out there know anything about the film "Soylent Green". Of course, it is of a dystopian theme for the future. Yet, when we look at the world today, that dystopia looks plausible future utopia. Why? Consider the growing population as well as the aging population. The current administration just commented that the greatest part of our debt is due to health care and the aging population. Yet, that same administration wants to expand health care for seniors in order to accommodate them and somehow bring down debt.

Well, it is certainly a strategy which has the agenda or goal to show how impossible that is and or will be. When young people (those under 65 or even 55) have had enough in terms of working to pay for that expansion  they will claim it is more humane to eliminate those that have lived and had jobs in order that the younger generation have their chance. This is even attractive and seems righteous but who is calling the shots on this, who is really in control and moving forward this agenda/goal?

Those that have money and power and want to remain as such in the future as they very well know it is impossible to sustain the current system let alone a future system with an aging population. The ruling class, the elites, will likely see such practice as humane and even civil; but, they couldn't be among them nor their children. Why? Because, someone or special group has to remain awake, alive and in control. They have reason or justification to live and that is to ensure the process of progress - what they know to be and deem the progressiveness of mankind.

Do you think it could not happen? Well, the beginning stages already appear at our doorstep. A content analysis is vital in illustrating this event on the horizon of a soylent green future.

CNSNews Feb . 23, 2016~ "The real problem that we have when it comes to debt is very simple," the President told the nation's governors on Monday. " It is that our population's getting older, and we use a lot of health care.

"Some of it is because -- the accident of how our health care system evolved means that we got private-sector involvement, and they've got to make a profit, and they've got overhead, and so forth...essentially, we spend about 6 to 8 percent more than our wealthy nation counterparts, per capita, on health care... is our debt."


You can get rid of all that discretionary spending. It won't matter, because the big-ticket item is Medicare, Medicaid, and in the private sector, the big-ticket item, that's where the inflation is, is on the health care side." Yet, Medicaid expansion is a "smart" way for the states to save money over the long-term.

Really, by expanding Medicaid to serve an aging population you can save money? The private sector cannot have any part in this because they have overhead; so, what does the government have... control? 

What will the progressives suggest next?