NYT: What is the social benefit of these old people?
The Times really seems to think we should call it a day at 80, as they wrote of this just a few years ago, too. Have we really become so secularized that we actually ponder the "social benefit" of people and seek to have our government and its media determine the optimum moment of life termination?
By the way, unmentioned by the author of the article is that he had heart surgery at the age of 83. Why didn't he just surrender to the inevitable instead of having the expensive [$80,000] procedure?